Ameer Alghusain v. Jason L. Nemeth;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AMEER ALGHUSAIN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JASON L. NEMETH; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-15110
D.C. No. 5:20-cv-05175-BLF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Beth Labson Freeman, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 20, 2021**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Ameer Alghusain appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his
motion for a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising out of
injuries Alghusain sustained in Ohio. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292(a)(1). We review for an abuse of discretion. Jackson v. City & County of
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
APR 29 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-15110
San Francisco, 746 F.3d 953, 958 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Alghusain’s motion
for a preliminary injunction because Alghusain failed to establish that he is likely
to succeed on the merits of his claims. See id. (plaintiff seeking preliminary
injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, he is 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).
We reject as without merit Alghusain’s contentions that the district court
was required to grant his motion because it was unopposed and that the district
court should have granted Alghusain an opportunity to file an amended motion.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --