Rios

MEMORANDUM **

In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Luis Rios (“Rios”) challenges the denial of his request for a preliminary injunction enjoining the City of Reno and Reno Police Officers Carranza and Miller from detaining, searching, and photographing him based solely on his association with suspected gang members. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (a)(1), and we affirm.

We review a district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction for abuse of discretion. Har ris v. Bd. of Supervisors, 366 F.3d 754 , 760 (9th Cir.2004). On the record before us, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Rios failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating a likelihood of success on the merits of his claims.

Rios first argues that the Reno Police Department (“RPD”)’s General Order should be amended because it is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad in its definition of “gang associate.” But Rios lacks standing to assert this claim because the General Order does not regulate his conduct. See Gospel Missions of Am. v. City of L.A., 328 F.3d 548 , 552, 555 (9th Cir.2003); Forbes v. Napolitano, 236 F.3d 1009, 1011 (9th Cir.2000). To the extent that the…