From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Otto v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Sep 10, 2013
540 F. App'x 590 (9th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 12-56438 D.C. No. 2:12-cv-06014-MMM-CW

2013-09-10

FRED JAY OTTO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; et al., Defendants - Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding

Before: TASHIMA, M.SMITH, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff Fred Otto appeals pro se the district court's denial of his request for preliminary injunctive relief against defendant prison officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and we affirm.

Our sole inquiry is whether the district court abused its discretion in denying preliminary injunctive relief, and we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion. Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 24 (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).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Otto v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Sep 10, 2013
540 F. App'x 590 (9th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Otto v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons

Case Details

Full title:FRED JAY OTTO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; et…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Sep 10, 2013

Citations

540 F. App'x 590 (9th Cir. 2013)

Citing Cases

Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse TEC, LLC

(SJ Ord. at 26 (citing Hoyt v. Lockheed Shipbuilding Co., No. C12-1648TSZ, 2013 WL 3270371, at *7 (W.D. Wash.…

Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse TEC, LLC

(See Castleman Dep. at 19:19-21.) Additionally, Union Pacific urges the court to follow Hoyt v. Lockheed…