Case Name: Sandra Segal POLIN, individually, dba Law Offices of Sandra Segal Polin and Lauri Kritt Martin, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Andy BEHRMAN, an individual and Skywriting, LLC, a California limited liability company, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-27
Citations: 429 F. App'x 682
Docket Number: No. 11-55075
Parties: Sandra Segal POLIN, individually, dba Law Offices of Sandra Segal Polin and Lauri Kritt Martin, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Andy BEHRMAN, an individual and Skywriting, LLC, a California limited liability company, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: RYMER, THOMAS and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 429
Pages: 682–683

Head Matter:
Sandra Segal POLIN, individually, dba Law Offices of Sandra Segal Polin and Lauri Kritt Martin, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Andy BEHRMAN, an individual and Skywriting, LLC, a California limited liability company, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-55075.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 20, 2011.
Filed April 27, 2011.
Mitchell Neil Reims, Esquire, Silver & Freedman, APLC, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Andy Behrman, Sherman OAKS, CA, pro se.
Michael Golland, Rosen Feig & Golland, LLP, Beverly Hills, CA, for DefendantAppellee.
Before: RYMER, THOMAS and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs-appellants Sandra Segal Polin and Lauri Kritt Martin appeal the district court's denial of their request for preliminary injunctive relief against defendantsappellees Andy Behrman and Skywriting, LLC. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and we affirm.
We express no view on the merits of the complaint. Our sole inquiry is whether the district court abused its discretion in denying preliminary injunctive relief. The Lands Council v. McNair, 537 F.3d 981, 986 (9th Cir.2008); see Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 129 S.Ct. 365, 374, 172 L.Ed.2d 249 (2008) (listing factors for district court to consider); Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press Int'l 686 F.2d 750, 752-53 (9th Cir.1982) (explaining limited scope of review). We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order denying the preliminary injunction.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.