Ackley v. Carroll et al
Filing
80
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that 78 Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction be DENIED re 1 Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/13/2011. Referred to Judge Ishii. Objections to F&R due within thirty (30) days. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
DONALD J. ACKLEY,
10
11
12
CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00771-AWI-BAM PC
Plaintiff,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDING DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
v.
D. CARROLL, et al.,
13
(ECF No. 78)
Defendants.
/
14
15
Plaintiff Donald J. Ackley (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
16
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is currently set for trial
17
on June 26, 2012. On December 8, 2011, Plaintiff filed a notice of change of address in which he
18
requested a new scheduling order and a preliminary injunction.1
19
Plaintiff seeks an order directing Lancaster State Prison to ship all of his personal property
20
to his new prison. As Plaintiff has previously been informed, for each form of relief sought in
21
federal court, Plaintiff must establish standing. Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th
22
Cir. 2010), cert.denied, 131 S. Ct. 503 (2010). This requires Plaintiff to “show that he is under threat
23
of suffering ‘injury in fact’ that is concrete and particularized; the threat must be actual and
24
imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; it must be fairly traceable to challenged conduct of the
25
defendant; and it must be likely that a favorable judicial decision will prevent or redress the injury.”
26
Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 129 S. Ct. 1142, 1149 (2009) (citation omitted); Mayfield, 599
27
1
28
Plaintiff’s motion to amend the scheduling order shall be addressed by an order issued concurrently with
these findings and recommendations.
1
F.3d at 969 (citation omitted).
In addition, any award of equitable relief is governed by the Prison Litigation Reform Act,
1
which provides in relevant part, “[p]rospective relief in any civil action with respect to prison
2
conditions shall extend no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right of a
3
particular plaintiff or plaintiffs. The court shall not grant or approve any prospective relief unless
4
the court finds that such relief is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the
5
violation of the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of
6
the Federal right.” 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A).
7
The case or controversy requirement cannot be met in light of the fact that the issue Plaintiff
8
seeks to remedy in his motion bears no relation to the claims that prison guards at Corcoran State
9
Prison used excessive force or retaliated against him. Lyons, 461 U.S. at 102; 18 U.S.C. §
10
3626(a)(1)(A); also Summers, 129 S. Ct. at 1148-49; Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523
11
U.S. 83, 102-04, 107 (1998). Because the case-or-controversy requirement cannot be met, the
12
pendency of this action provides no basis upon which to award Plaintiff the requested injunctive
13
relief. Steel Co., 523 U.S. at 102-103.
14
15
Accordingly, it is recommended that Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief, filed December,
8, 2011, be DENIED, for lack of jurisdiction.
16
It is ordered that this finding and recommendation be submitted to the United States District
17
Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within
18
THIRTY (30) DAYS after being served with the finding and recommendation, Plaintiff may file
19
written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate
20
Judge’s Finding and Recommendation.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the
21
specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d
22
1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
23
24
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
10c20k
December 13, 2011
/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?