You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

T.E.F. v. Dasen

Citation: 154 F. App'x 632Docket: No. 05-35700

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; November 15, 2005; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Jurisdiction for the appeal of the preliminary injunction is established under 28 U.S.C. 1292(a)(1), with review limited to whether the district court abused its discretion. The Ninth Circuit affirms the district court's decision, noting that the review of preliminary injunctions is more constrained than that of permanent injunctions. The court finds no abuse of discretion, as the district court did not apply an erroneous legal standard or make clearly erroneous factual findings. The order granting the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is upheld. The court clarifies that this ruling will only affect the parties' rights until the district court issues a final judgment. The appellee's motion to strike the appellant’s reply brief is denied, as is the request for permission to file a sur-reply. The decision is affirmed and is not intended for publication or citation except as allowed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

Abuse of Discretion in Granting Preliminary Injunction

Application: The court concludes that the district court did not abuse its discretion because it neither applied an erroneous legal standard nor made clearly erroneous factual findings.

Reasoning: The court finds no abuse of discretion, as the district court did not apply an erroneous legal standard or make clearly erroneous factual findings.

Denial of Motion to Strike and Sur-Reply

Application: The appellate court denies the appellee's motion to strike the appellant’s reply brief and the request for permission to file a sur-reply.

Reasoning: The appellee's motion to strike the appellant’s reply brief is denied, as is the request for permission to file a sur-reply.

Effect of Preliminary Injunction Ruling

Application: The ruling on the preliminary injunction will temporarily affect the parties' rights until a final judgment is issued by the district court.

Reasoning: The court clarifies that this ruling will only affect the parties' rights until the district court issues a final judgment.

Jurisdiction for Appeal of Preliminary Injunction

Application: The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction to review the appeal of the preliminary injunction under 28 U.S.C. 1292(a)(1), with the scope of review limited to determining whether the district court abused its discretion.

Reasoning: Jurisdiction for the appeal of the preliminary injunction is established under 28 U.S.C. 1292(a)(1), with review limited to whether the district court abused its discretion.

Publication and Citation of Decision

Application: The decision is not intended for publication or citation except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Reasoning: The decision is affirmed and is not intended for publication or citation except as allowed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Standard of Review for Preliminary Injunctions

Application: The Ninth Circuit affirms the district court's decision by applying a more constrained review for preliminary injunctions as opposed to permanent injunctions, focusing on discretion rather than factual findings.

Reasoning: The Ninth Circuit affirms the district court's decision, noting that the review of preliminary injunctions is more constrained than that of permanent injunctions.