United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Property
PropertyPreliminary injunctionpreliminary injunctionabuse of discretionprobable success on the meritspossibility of irreparable injuryclearly erroneous findingsinterlocutory appeal
Facts
The opinion arises from Mattel's request for a preliminary injunction against Walking Mountain Productions. The record before the court concerned whether Mattel had shown probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury. The district court denied preliminary relief. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit limited its review to whether that denial rested on legal error, clearly erroneous factfinding, or an abuse of discretion.
Issue
Whether the district court abused its discretion, relied on an erroneous legal standard, or made clearly erroneous findings of fact in denying Mattel's motion for a preliminary injunction. More specifically, the question was whether the district court erred in concluding that Mattel failed to show probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury.
Rule
An appellate court reviewing the denial of a preliminary injunction asks whether the district court abused its discretion, based its decision on an erroneous legal standard, or relied on clearly erroneous findings of fact. A preliminary injunction requires a showing of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
In Phoenix, Nora Lin sued Desert Lantern Galleries for property-related trademark misuse and sought a preliminary injunction. The district court denied relief after stating that Nora had not shown probable success on the merits or the possibility of irreparable injury, and the record shows the court applied the proper test and made supported factual findings.
If Nora appeals, what is the most likely result?
Explanation. The governing rule is narrow appellate review of a denial of a preliminary injunction: the appellate court asks whether the district court abused its discretion, based its decision on an erroneous legal standard, or relied on clearly erroneous findings of fact. Where the district court used the correct standard and its findings are not clearly erroneous, affirmance is proper. (Derived from Mattel, Inc. v. Walking Mountain Productions (n.d.).)