Leonard Fyock v. City of Sunnyvale

Bad Law
779 F.3d 991·2015 WL 897747·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 3471
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 4, 201514-15408California4,000 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hawkins, J.

In this interlocutory appeal, Leonard Fyock, William Douglas, Scott Hochstet-ler, David Pearson, Brad Seifers, and Ron Swanson (collectively “Fyock”) challenge an order denying their request to preliminarily enjoin an ordinance recently enacted by the City of Sunnyvale, California (“Sunnyvale”), restricting the possession of “large-capacity magazines”—statutorily defined as a detachable ammunition feeding device capable of accepting more than ten rounds. Fyock claims that Sunnyvale’s ordinance, part of a ballot measure known as Measure C, violates his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and will irreparably harm him if not immediately enjoined.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (a)(1). Because we find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding Fyock’s likelihood of success on the merits of his constitutional challenge, we affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The manufacture, sale, purchase, and possession of large-capacity magazines has been regulated in California for approximately twenty years through a combination of federal and state laws. In 1994, Congress enacted the Violent Crime Control and Law…

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.