ORDER

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

On May 15, 2015, the court issued an order denying the plaintiffs' request for a writ of mandate and preliminary injunction, ECF No. 93, and on May 19, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a notice of interlocutory appeal of that order, ECF No. 94. On May 23, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a request for an injunction pending appeal. ECF No. 97.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(c) provides that a court may grant an injunction during the pendency of an interlocutory appeal. The same legal standard applies to a motion for an injunction pending appeal as to a motion for a preliminary injunction. Sierra Forest Legacy v. Rey, 691 F.Supp.2d 1204, 1207 (E.D. Cal. 2010); Protect Our Water v. Flowers, 377 F.Supp.2d 882, 883 (E.D. Cal. 2004). That standard, as discussed in the court's prior order, requires the moving party to show "that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest." Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). An injunction may issue only upon a clear showing the movant is entitled to relief. Lopez v. Brewer, 680 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir. 2012).

Here, the plaintiffs request relief "[f]or the reasons stated in their [previous] motion." ECF No. 97. Because the court reviewed that motion in its previous order and concluded the plaintiffs had not made the required showing, it likewise declines to issue an injunction now.

The request is DENIED. This order disposes of ECF No. 97.

IT IS SO ORDERED.