PP&MTOWING & RECOVERY, INC., a California corporation v. City

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
PP&M TOWING & RECOVERY, INC., a
California corporation,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, a subdivision of the State of
California; GEORGE GASCON, in his
capacity as the Chief of Police of the City
of San Francisco, California,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 10-16062
D.C. No. 3:10-cv-01466-THE
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Thelton E. Henderson, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 23, 2010**
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
FILED
AUG 31 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 10-16062
PP&M Towing & Recovery, Inc. appeals the district court’s denial of its
request for preliminary injunctive relief against the City & County of San
Francisco and George Gascon, in his official capacity as Chief of Police. 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. v. United Press Int’l,
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.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --