Terry Lee Associates, L.l.c.,plaintiff-counter-defendant-third-party-defendant-appellee,james B. Screpel, As Guardian for Terri Lee Schrepel,plaintiff-third-party-defendant-appellee,drienne Lee Spencer, As Guardian for Terri Lee Schrepel;connie Lynn Thyne, Plaintiffs-appellees, v. Dale E. Noble, D/b/a Doll City, Usa,defendant-counter-claim-third-party-plaintiff-appellant, v. Fritz Lee Duda, Third-party-defendant-appellee, 131 F.3d 148 (9th Cir. 1997)

MEMORANDUM^* 

This preliminary injunction appeal comes to us for review under Ninth Circuit Rule 3-3. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a) (1), and we affirm.

Our inquiry is limited to whether the district court has abused its discretion in granting the preliminary injunction or based its decision on an erroneous legal standard or on clearly erroneous findings of fact. See Does 1-5 v. Chandler, 83 F.3d 1150, 1152 (9th Cir. 1996).

The record before us shows that the district court did not rely upon ar erroneous legal premise or abuse its discretion in concluding that appellee's showing of the existence of serious questions going to the merits and the balance of hardships tipping in appellee's favor was sufficient to warrant the preliminary injunctive relief. See id.; see also Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press Int'l, Inc., 686 F.2d 750, 753 (9th Cir. 1982) (stating legal standards governing issuance of preliminary injunction). Moreover, the court's factual findings are not clearly erroneous. See Chandler, 83 F.3d at 1152.

Accordingly, the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction is AFFIRMED.