Coleman v. CDCR, et al.

Filing 69

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief 44 , 56 ; ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions 65 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 12/8/11. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8

ROBERT E. COLEMAN,

9

Plaintiff,

10
11

CASE NO. 1:09-CV-00224-DLB PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
(DOCS. 44, 56)

v.
CDCR, et al.,

12

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR SANCTIONS (DOC. 65)
Defendants.
/

13
14

I.

15

Background
Plaintiff Robert E. Coleman (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

16

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in

17

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants R. Chavez,

18

A. Diaz, M. Lopez, P. Maldonado, T. Norton, and S. Rousseau have appeared in this action.

19

Pending before the Court are: 1) Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction, filed April 6,

20

2011, 2) Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction, filed August 17, 2011, and 3) a motion for

21

sanctions, filed November 2, 2011. Docs. 44, 56, 65. Defendants filed an opposition to the latter

22

two motions. Docs. 59, 66. The matter is submitted pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).

23

II.

24

Motion For Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 44)
Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction at Corcoran State Prison for: 1) Defenadnts

25

to cease from retaliation, 2) discontinue inmate assignment housing policy, 3) order Plaintiff’s

26

release from administrative segregation or a move to a different administrative segregation, 4)

27

and order the law librarian to allow Plaintiff obtain legal books and assistance from the law

28

librarian. Doc. 44.
1

1

“A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on

2

the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the

3

balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Winter v.

4

Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 129 S. Ct. 365, 374 (2008) (citations omitted). A preliminary

5

injunction becomes moot if a prisoner is transferred. Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1053

6

n.5 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Johnson v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 510 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam)).

7

Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at Corcoran State Prison, as he has since been transferred to

8

California State Prison at Sacramento. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary

9

injunction, filed April 6, 2011, is denied.

10

II.

Motion For Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 56)

11

Plaintiff moves for: 1) declaratory relief that Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights were

12

violated and false evidence and abuse of authority occurred against Plaintiff; and 2) the false

13

documents be expunged from his central file. Doc. 56. Defendants contend that declaratory

14

judgment should not be granted, and that Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and

15

likelihood of success on the merits.

16

As to Plaintiff’s request for declaratory relief, Plaintiff’s request is denied. “Declaratory

17

relief should be denied when it will neither serve a useful purpose in clarifying and settling the

18

legal relations in issue nor terminate the proceedings and afford relief from the uncertainty and

19

controversy faced by the parties.” United States v. Washington, 759 F.2d 1353, 1357 (9th Cir.

20

1985) (en banc) (per curiam). This action is currently pending before the Court. Defendants

21

have not yet had the opportunity to defend in this action. There is no useful purpose to granting

22

declaratory relief at this time.

23

As to Plaintiff’s request for preliminary injunction, Plaintiff’s request is denied. Plaintiff

24

has failed to demonstrate irreparable harm regarding allegedly false documents in his central file.

25

“To support injunctive relief, harm must not only be irreparable, it must be imminent . . . ‘ a

26

plaintiff must demonstrate immediate threatened injury as a prerequisite to preliminary injunctive

27

relief.’” Amylin Pharms., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 22108, *7 (9th Cir. Oct.

28

31, 2011) (quoting Caribbean Marine Servs. Co., Inc. v. Baldrige, 844 F.2d 668, 674 (9th Cir.
2

1

1988)). Plaintiff reiterates his claims, but fails to demonstrate irreparable harm. Accordingly,

2

Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction, filed August 17, 2011, is denied.

3

III.

4

Motion For Sanctions (Doc. 65)
Plaintiff moves for sanctions regarding Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff contends

5

that Defendants acted in bad faith by sending the motion, and their opposition to Plaintiff’s

6

motion for injunctive relief, to Plaintiff’s former address at Corcoran State Prison, rather than his

7

current address at Sacramento State Prison. Doc. 65. Defendants contend that it was error on the

8

part of newly-hired staff. Doc. 66. Defendants contend the mistakes were unintentional, and

9

Plaintiff was not prejudiced, because the documents were properly mailed on November 7, 2011.

10
11

Defendants include a declaration from the staff member.
The imposition of sanctions appears unnecessary, as Plaintiff was not prejudiced in this

12

action, and there is no evidence that Defendants acted in bad faith. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s

13

motion, filed November 7, 2011, is denied.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
3b142a

December 8, 2011

/s/ Dennis L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3