Kira

MEMORANDUM

Kira Plastinina Style, Ltd. (“KP Style”), owner of the “Kira Plastinina” trademark, appeals from the district court’s grant of a preliminary injunction to Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc. (“Pac Sun”), owner of the “Kirra” trademark. KP Style argues that the district court erred in finding there was a strong likelihood of confusion between the two trademarks. KP Style also argues that the district court erred in enjoining the use of “Kira Plastinina,” the name of one of KP Style’s designers, and in granting an injunction that enjoined nontrademark uses of the “Kira Plastini-na” mark and was overbroad. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (a)(1), and we affirm.

Our review of a district court’s grant of a preliminary injunctive relief is “limited and deferential,” and we reverse only if the district court abused its discretion. Sw. Voter Registration Educ. Project v. Shelley, 344 F.3d 914 , 918 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc) (per curiam). A district court abuses its discretion when it bases its decision on an erroneous legal standard or on clearly erroneous findings of fact. GoTo.com, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co., 202 F.3d 1199, 1204 (9th Cir.2000). Our review of…