WHY DID 1T4O21 REFUSE TO CAVE PRO-SE PHAINTIFF THE PRESCRIPTFONS CON SISTINE OF LIQVID VIAL MEDICINE AND DISPOSABLE HYPO DERMIC NEEDIE SYRINGES

WHH SH WN S-O HOL 6 1S NOT INFECTED(MBIH T4O36) AND GAVE CLINICLETTEL OF THIS DIAG-NOSIS JU/Y 18, 2016 PROSE PUAINTIFF A Fresep THE VRINE ECTION TEW PRO-SE PLAINT DID 1740H YOU HAVE F SUFFELR BECAUSE SHE IS NOT GIVING PRO-SE IFF A LIQVID GENERIC FOR VALT

WNAOS NILOUON JO NOLISI 500MGRX 719 1O9T 1S SEVERELY TAINTED. PRO-SEPHMINTIFF WAS OVD FROM IIHOI AHL SHE DID HESM WA'S WRITE THE AND FAX TTOMAH PHARMACfOCF.D.A. 7 ANALYZATION) FHM DIDN'T 174021 GIVE PRO-SE PLAINTIFF THE PRESCUPTIONS AND ALSO NEEDED MEDICINES FOR SQUAMOUS EPITHELIAL AND URINE MVEVS CONTAM INATIONS THAT 173128 (170V5013) AND 1T40 36 ATTHE SAME TIME INFECTING PRO SE WITH HSVM HSVJ

Why did the court not grant the petitioner's request for a preliminary injunction?