Lance Conway Wood v. SUE WASHBURN, Superintendent of Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution ("EOCI"), in…

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LANCE CONWAY WOOD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SUE WASHBURN, Superintendent of
Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution
("EOCI"), in her individual and official
capacities; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-35892
D.C. No. 2:20-cv-00362-SB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Stacie F. Beckerman, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**
Submitted January 20, 2021***
Before: McKEOWN, CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
Oregon state prisoner Lance Conway Wood appeals pro se from the district
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(c).
*** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JAN 29 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-35892
court’s order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction in his action in his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation and due process violations. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review for an abuse of discretion.
Jackson v. City & County of San Francisco, 746 F.3d 953, 958 (9th Cir. 2014).
We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Wood’s motion for
a preliminary injunction because Wood failed to establish that he was likely to
suffer irreparable harm. See Boardman v. Pac. Seafood Grp., 822 F.3d 1011, 1022
(9th Cir. 2016) (explaining that “[s]peculative injury does not constitute irreparable
injury sufficient [to obtain a preliminary injunction]”).
We reject as without merit Wood’s contention that the district court was
required to hold an evidentiary hearing regarding Wood’s motion for a preliminary
injunction.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --