Benyamini v. Manjuano et al

Filing 166

ORDER DENYING 165 Motion for Stay and Motion for Order Releasing Plaintiff from Ad-Seg and Allowing him to Possess a Tape Recorder signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/14/2012. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

16

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
DEBBIE MANJUANO, et al.,
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________)

17

I.

12
13
14
15

ROBERT BENYAMINI,

18

1:06-cv-01096-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STAY AND
MOTION FOR ORDER RELEASING PLAINTIFF
FROM AD-SEG AND ALLOWING HIM TO
POSSESS A TAPE RECORDER
(Doc. 165.)

BACKGROUND
Robert Benyamini (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

19

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the original Complaint on August

20

21, 2006, and this action now proceeds on the Third Amended Complaint filed on May 23, 2008,

21

against defendants Mandujano, Wilcox, Wilkerson, and O’Grady, on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment

22

claims for adverse conditions of confinement (Docs. 1, 35.) On March 12, 2012, Plaintiff filed a

23

motion for stay of this action and a for a court order releasing him from administrative segregation

24

(“Ad-Seg”) and allowing him to possess a tape recorder. (Doc. 165.)

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

1

1
2

II.

MOTION FOR RELEASE FROM AD-SEG AND POSSESSION OF TAPE
RECORDER

3

Plaintiff requests a court order releasing him from Ad-Seg to enable him to meet deadlines in

4

this action and prove that he did not commit the infraction for which he was placed in Ad-Seg.

5

Plaintiff also requests a court order allowing him to possess a tape recorder to tape hearings at the

6

prison. The Court lacks jurisdiction to issue an order requiring prison officials to release him from

7

Ad-Seg or to allow him to possess a tape recorder, because the Court does not have such a case or

8

controversy before it in this action. See Zepeda v. United States Immigration Service, 753 F.2d 719,

9

727 (9th Cir. 1985); City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983);

10

Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464,

11

471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 757-58 (1982). Moreover, the Court recognizes that prison administrators

12

"should be accorded wide-ranging deference in the adoption and execution of policies and practices

13

that in their judgment are needed to preserve internal order and discipline and to maintain

14

institutional security." Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 321-322 (1986) (quoting Bell v. Wolfish,

15

441 U.S. 520, 547 (1970). Furthermore, Plaintiff does not presently have any pending deadlines in

16

this action. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion shall be denied.

17

III.

18

MOTION FOR STAY
Plaintiff also requests a stay of this action because he is presently detained in Ad-Seg without

19

access to his property, cannot make copies, and cannot do research from his cell because he suffers

20

from claustrophobia.

21

Plaintiff’s motion for stay shall be denied. Plaintiff has brought numerous motions for stay in

22

this action and has been advised that the Court does not lightly stay litigation, due to the possibility

23

of prejudice to defendants. Moreover, Plaintiff does not presently have any pending deadlines in this

24

action for which he needs to do research or make copies. Plaintiff has not shown good cause for the

25

Court to stay this litigation. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion shall be denied.

26

///

27

///

28

2

1

IV.

CONCLUSION

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

3

1.

4

Plaintiff's motion for a court order releasing him from Ad-Seg and allowing him to
possess a tape recorder is DENIED; and

5

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for stay is DENIED.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated:
6i0kij

March 14, 2012

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3