WAHID v. LAKE (2020)

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Samir M. Wahid appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction in his action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. 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 by denying Wahid's motion for a preliminary injunction because Wahid failed to demonstrate that such relief is warranted. See id. (plaintiff seeking preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, the balance of equities tips in his favor, and an injunction is in the public interest).

Wahid's pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.