Sherry Martin, dba Sherry Martin Photography v. Walt Disney Internet Group;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHERRY MARTIN, dba Sherry Martin
Photography,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WALT DISNEY INTERNET GROUP; et
al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 10-55005
D.C. No. 3:09-cv-01601-MMA-
POR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Michael M. Anello, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Plaintiff-appellant Sherry Martin, dba Sherry Martin Photography appeals
the district court’s denial of her request for preliminary injunctive relief against
defendants-appellees in connection with appellant’s complaint against them for
FILED
APR 12 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

copyright infringement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and
we affirm.
We express no view on the merits of the complaint. Our sole inquiry is
whether the district court abused its discretion in denying preliminary injunctive
relief. The Lands Council v. McNair, 537 F.3d 981, 986 (9th Cir. 2008); see
Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 129 S. Ct. 365, 374 (2008) (listing
factors for district court to consider); Sports Form, Inc., 686 F.2d 750, 752-53
(9th Cir. 1982) (explaining limited scope of review). We conclude the district
court did not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order
denying the preliminary injunction.
We deny appellant’s request for oral argument and her motion to strike
portions of the answering brief.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --