Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Cen v. Patricia Grantham

Good Law
424 F. App'x 635
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 25, 201110-17347California1,183 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for preliminary injunction to halt post-fire salvage logging in Klamath National Forest. We affirm.

I. Standard of Review for a Preliminary Injunction

At the outset, we note that the standard of review for the denial of a preliminary injunction is deferential, as is our review of the agency’s decision. A court may set aside only agency actions that are “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.” Earth Island Inst. v. Carlton, 626 F.3d 462, 468 (9th Cir.2010). “A district court abuses its discretion in denying a request for a preliminary injunction if it bases its decision on an erroneous legal standard or clearly erroneous finding of fact.” Id.

Because we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Plaintiffs failed to raise serious questions going to the merits of their claims, we need not reach whether Plaintiffs would have prevailed on the remaining elements for a preliminary injunction. See Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir.2011); Doe v. Reed, 586 F.3d 671 , 681 n. 14 (9th Cir.2009).

II.…

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.