Unpublished Disposition, 928 F.2d 1137 (9th Cir. 1991)

MEMORANDUM^** 

De Von Theobald appeals pro se the district court's denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction. Theobald contends he was denied meaningful access to the courts by (1) refusal of inmate law clerks to assist him because he is a sex offender, (2) a law library which is inadequate because it does not stock all regional reporters, and (3) an inadequate supply of materials for Theobald's use in performing his legal work. We affirm.

DISCUSSION

Our review of the district court's denial of Theobald's motion for preliminary injunction is constrained by a deferential standard of review. Half Moon Bay Fishermens' Mktg. Ass'n v. Carlucci, 857 F.2d 505, 507 (9th Cir. 1988); Apple Computer v. Formula Int'l, 725 F.2d 521, 523 (9th Cir. 1984). The grant or denial of a motion for preliminary injunction will only be reversed if the district court based its decision on erroneous legal standards or clearly erroneous findings of fact, or otherwise abused its discretion.¹  Airline Pilots Ass'n v. Alaska Airlines, 898 F.2d 1393, 1395 (9th Cir. 1990); California v. American Stores Co., 872 F.2d 837, 840 (9th Cir. 1989).

Absent one of these errors, we will not reverse the district court's decision merely because we would have arrived at a different result if we had initially applied the law to the facts of this case. Dollar Rent-A-Car v. Traveler's Indem. Co., 774 F.2d 1371, 1374 (9th Cir. 1985). "The [reviewing] court is not empowered to substitute its judgment for that of the [district court]." Big Country Foods v. Bd. of Educ., 868 F.2d 1085, 1087 (9th Cir. 1989).

The traditional equitable criteria to consider in issuing an injunction are whether the moving party has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury. City of Los Angeles v. McLaughlin, 865 F.2d 1084, 1086 (9th Cir. 1989) (citing Arcamuzi v. Continental Airlines, 819 F.2d 935, 937 (9th Cir. 1987)). Alternatively, the movant may show that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships tips sharply in its favor. Id.

Under either formulation of the test, the moving party must demonstrate a significant threat of irreparable harm. Caribbean Marine Serv. v. Baldridge, 844 F.2d 668, 674 (9th Cir. 1988). A plaintiff must do more than merely allege imminent harm sufficient to establish standing; a plaintiff must demonstrate immediate threatened injury as a prerequisite to preliminary injunctive relief. Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Comm'n v. Nat'l Football League, 634 F.2d at 1197, 1201 (9th Cir. 1980).

The district court properly concluded that Theobald failed to meet this burden. There is nothing in the record to indicate any immediate danger of irreparable injury to Theobald. He obtained the assistance of an inmate in this action and demonstrated no disadvantage by the alleged inadequate law library or legal supplies.

The district court's denial of Theobald's application for a preliminary injunction is AFFIRMED.