Chinatown Neighborhood Association v. Edmund Brown, Jr.

Good Law
539 F. App'x 761
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 27, 201313-15188California658 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

The Chinatown Neighborhood Association and Asian Americans for Political Advancement (collectively “Chinatown”) appeal the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of sections 2021 and 2021.5 of the California Fish and Game Code (the “Shark Fin Law”). Subject to certain exceptions, the Shark Fin Law makes it “unlawful for any person to possess, sell, offer for sale, trade, or distribute a shark fin” in California. Id. § 2021(b).

We have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (a)(1) and review the denial of a preliminary injunction for abuse of discretion. Am. Trucking Ass’ns v. City of L.A., 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir.2009). On the record before it, the district court did not abuse its discretion, and we accordingly affirm.

1.The district court properly applied the Winter test in analyzing the preliminary injunction application. Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 , 129 S.Ct. 365 , 172 L.Ed.2d 249 (2008). Contrary to Chinatown’s protestations, the district court also expressly found that Chinatown failed to meet its burden under the alternative “serious questions” test articulated in Alliance for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.