Dillard v. CBS Studios, Inc.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 28 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MERILAND DILLARD, No. 25-6180 D.C. No. 8:25-cv-02091-JAK-KES Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEMORANDUM* CBS STUDIOS, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 22, 2026** Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges. Meriland Dillard appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction in his action alleging copyright infringement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review for an abuse of discretion. Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 * 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). (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Dillard’s motion for a preliminary injunction because Dillard failed to establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits of his claims. See Garcia v. Google, Inc., 786 F.3d 733, 740 (9th Cir. 2015) (en banc) (setting out preliminary injunction requirements and noting that “when a plaintiff has failed to show the likelihood of success on the merits, we need not consider the remaining three [Winter elements]” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Biani v. Showtime Networks, Inc., 153 F.4th 957, 962 (9th Cir. 2025) (setting out the requirements to establish factual copying). We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). Dillard’s request to expedite the issuance of the mandate, set forth in his opening brief, is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 25-6180