Vivek Shah v. Charles E. Samuels, Jr., D.S.C.C. Administrator, sued in his official capacity

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-1952
___________________________
Vivek Shah
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Charles E. Samuels, Jr., D.S.C.C. Administrator, sued in his official capacity;
United States of America; Jose A. Santana, DSCC Administrator (originally
named as Doe)
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
____________
Submitted: August 13, 2015
Filed: August 18, 2015
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.

-- 1 of 2 --

In this interlocutory appeal in a pro se action under Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), federal inmate
Vivek Shah challenges the district court’s denials of preliminary injunctive relief.1
After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we
conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying injunctive
relief, because Shah did not show a clear threat of irreparable harm. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292(a)(1) (appellate jurisdiction); H&R Block Tax. Servs. LLC v. Acevedo-Lopez,
742 F.3d 1074, 1077 (8th Cir. 2014) (standard of review); Dataphase Sys., Inc. v.
C.L. Sys., Inc., 640 F.2d 109, 113 (8th Cir. 1981) (en banc) (setting forth relevant
factors to be considered in determining whether preliminary injunction should issue).
The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
The Honorable Jerome T. Kearney, United States Magistrate Judge for the1
Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --