Case Name: David T. LASHGARI; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. William J. BRATTON, Chief, Lapd, Chief; et al., Defendants-Appellees, v. J. Nicholson; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-12-12
Citations: 158 F. App'x 798
Docket Number: No. 05-55061
Parties: David T. LASHGARI; et al., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. William J. BRATTON, Chief, Lapd, Chief; et al., Defendants—Appellees, v. J. Nicholson; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 158
Pages: 798–799

Head Matter:
David T. LASHGARI; et al., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. William J. BRATTON, Chief, Lapd, Chief; et al., Defendants—Appellees, v. J. Nicholson; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
No. 05-55061.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 5, 2005.
Decided Dec. 12, 2005.
David T. Lashgari, Lashgari & Associates, P.C., Marietta, GA, pro se.
Marje H. Lashgari, Lashgari & Associates, Marietta, GA, pro se.
Blithe S. Bock, Esq., Susan Kawala, Attorney’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, Clayton C. Averbuck, Esq., Monroy, Averbuck and Gysler, Westlake Village, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: GOODWIN, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
We subject a district court's order regarding preliminary injunctive relief to only limited review. Walczak v. EPL Prolong, Inc., 198 F.3d 725, 730 (9th Cir.1999). Our review of an order regarding a preliminary injunction "is much more limited than review of an order involving a permanent injunction, where all conclusions of law are freely reviewable." Id. A decision regarding a preliminary injunction is reviewed for abuse of discretion, which occurs only if the district court based its decision on either an erroneous legal standard or clearly erroneous factual findings. Id.
The district court did not abuse its discretion here. See Martin v. Int'l Olympic Comm., 740 F.2d 670, 674-75 (9th Cir. 1984). We therefore affirm the district court's order denying plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Our disposition will affect the rights of the parties only until the district court renders final judgment. Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press International, 686 F.2d 750, 752 (9th Cir. 1982).
Appellee County of Los Angeles' request for judicial notice is granted. All other pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.