Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10597550
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Bong v. Oregon School Boards Association
No. 10597550 · Decided June 3, 2025
No. 10597550·Ninth Circuit · 2025·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 3, 2025
Citation
No. 10597550
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JILL BONG, No. 24-7834
D.C. No. 6:23-cv-00417-MTK
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. MEMORANDUM*
OREGON SCHOOL BOARDS
ASSOCIATION; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Mustafa T. Kasubhai, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 21, 2025**
Before: SILVERMAN, LEE, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Jill Bong appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying her motion
for a preliminary injunction in her action alleging federal and state law claims
arising out of the termination of her employment. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review for an abuse of discretion. Am. Trucking Ass’ns,
*
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).
Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Bong’s motion for a
preliminary injunction because Bong, who is no longer employed by the
defendants, failed to establish the requirements for such relief. See id. (plaintiff
seeking preliminary injunction must establish that she is likely to succeed on the
merits, she is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief,
the balance of equities tips in her favor, and an injunction is in the public interest);
see also Park Vill. Apartment Tenants Ass’n v. Mortimer Howard Tr., 636 F.3d
1150, 1160 (9th Cir. 2011) (stating that mandatory injunctions are not generally
granted “unless extreme or very serious damage will result” (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted)).
To the extent that Bong challenges any other orders, we lack jurisdiction to
consider them in this appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (generally, court has
jurisdiction over appeals from final decisions of the district court only).
The motion (Docket Entry No. 71) to file a replacement reply brief is
granted. The clerk will file the consolidated reply brief at Docket Entry No. 70.
All other pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 24-7834
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025 MOLLY C.
02MEMORANDUM* OREGON SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION; et al., Defendants - Appellees.
03Kasubhai, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 21, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, LEE, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
04Jill Bong appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying her motion for a preliminary injunction in her action alleging federal and state law claims arising out of the termination of her employment.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Bong v. Oregon School Boards Association in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 3, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10597550 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.