Polk v. Lattimore et al

Filing 17

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending that Plaintiff's 11 Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief be Denied signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 07/18/2013. Referred to Judge Ishii; Objections to F&R due by 8/20/2013. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SUSAN MAE POLK,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

1:12-cv-01156-AWI-GSA-PC
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF=S
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BE DENIED
(Doc. 11.)

vs.
MARY LATTIMORE, et al.,

15

Defendants.

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN 30 DAYS

16
17

I.

BACKGROUND

18

Susan Mae Polk (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

19

with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff is presently incarcerated in

20

the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) at the

21

California Institution for Women (CIW) in Corona, California.

22
23

Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on July 16, 2012. (Doc. 1.) On
September 20, 2012, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 8.)

24

On December 13, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunctive relief, which

25

is now before the court. (Doc. 11.)

26

II.

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

27

AA preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right.@

28

Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 129 S.Ct. 365, 376 (2008) (citation
1

1

omitted). AA plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to

2

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

3

relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public

4

interest.@ Id. at 374 (citations omitted). An injunction may only be awarded upon a clear

5

showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. Id. at 376 (citation omitted) (emphasis added).

6

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and in considering a request for

7

preliminary injunctive relief, the Court is bound by the requirement that as a preliminary

8

matter, it have before it an actual case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S.

9

95, 102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for

10

Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 757-58 (1982). If the

11

Court does not have an actual case or controversy before it, it has no power to hear the matter

12

in question.

13

3626(a)(1)(A) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which requires that the Court find the

14

Arelief [sought] is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violation of

15

the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of the

16

Federal right.@

Id.

Requests for prospective relief are further limited by 18 U.S.C. '

17

Plaintiff’s Motion

18

Plaintiff has requested a court order directing CDCR Secretary Matthew Cate to enjoin

19

CDCR officials at CIW from jeopardizing Plaintiff’s safety by housing her in a cell with

20

multiple inmates and retaliating against her by falsifying documents in her prison file.

21

The order requested by Plaintiff would not remedy any of the claims upon which this

22

action proceeds. This action is proceeding against defendants based on events occurring at the

23

Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla, California, before she filed this action in

24

September 2012. Plaintiff now requests a court order protecting her from present and future

25

actions at CIW. Because such an order would not remedy any of the claims upon which this

26

action proceeds, the Court lacks jurisdiction to issue the order sought by Plaintiff, and

27

Plaintiff=s motion must be denied.

28

///
2

1

III.

2
3

RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing, the court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff=s motion for

preliminary injunctive relief, filed on December 13, 2012, be DENIED.

4

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District

5

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(l). Within

6

thirty (30) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, plaintiff may

7

file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned AObjections to

8

Magistrate Judge=s Findings and Recommendations.@ Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

9

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court=s order.

10

Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

15
16
17

July 18, 2013

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DEAC_Signature-END:

6i0kij8d

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