Garcia v. Biter et al

Filing 40

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that Plaintiff's Motion be DENIED, with prejudice re 35 MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER filed by Felipe Garcia ; referred to Judge O'Neill,signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 04/28/2015. Objections to F&R due by 5/22/2015 (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 FELIPE GARCIA, Plaintiff, 11 12 v. 13 M. BITER, et al., 14 Case No. 1:13-cv-00599-LJO-SKO (PC) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BE DENIED Defendants. _____________________________________/ (Doc. 35) 15 16 Plaintiff Felipe Garcia, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this 17 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on April 25, 2013. This action for damages is 18 proceeding on Plaintiff’s third amended complaint against Defendants Hernandez, Mosqueda, and 19 Baker for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and for endangering Plaintiff safety in 20 violation of the Eighth Amendment. The events at issue occurred between June 2012 and January 21 2013 at Kern Valley State Prison. 22 On April 8, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking an injunction prohibiting Defendants, 23 “their successors in office, agents and employees and all other persons” from endangering 24 Plaintiff’s safety by calling him a snitch in front of other inmates and from retaliating against him. 25 (Doc. 35.) 26 “A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right.” Winter 27 v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24, 129 S.Ct. 365, 376 (2008) (citation 28 omitted). “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed 1 on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that 2 the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Id. at 20 3 (citations omitted). An injunction may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is 4 entitled to relief. Id. at 22 (citation omitted) (emphasis added). 5 As a threshold matter, for each form of relief sought in federal court, Plaintiff must 6 establish standing. Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493, 129 S.Ct. 1142, 1149 7 (2009); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2010). This requires Plaintiff to 8 show that he is under threat of suffering an injury in fact that is concrete and particularized; the 9 threat must be actual and imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; it must be fairly traceable to 10 challenged conduct of the defendant; and it must be likely that a favorable judicial decision will 11 prevent or redress the injury. Summers, 555 U.S. at 493 (quotation marks and citation omitted); 12 Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969. This action is limited to monetary damages for the past violation of 13 Plaintiff’s rights at Kern Valley State Prison, and Plaintiff lacks standing, in this action, to seek 14 any orders for equitable relief remedying his current conditions of confinement at California State 15 Prison-Corcoran. Accordingly, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff’s motion be 16 DENIED, with prejudice. 17 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 18 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 19 twenty (20) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file 20 written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 21 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within 22 the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 23 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 24 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 28, 2015 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?