Krzysztof Wolinski v. Acosta et al

Filing 10

ORDER DENYING Motion for Order Directing Prison to Provide Plaintiff With Writing Supplies 6 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 7/31/15: Motion is DENIED for lack of jurisdiction. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KRZYSZTOF WOLINSKI,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.

1:15-cv-00519-LJO-GSA-PC
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ORDER
DIRECTING PRISON TO PROVIDE
PLAINTIFF WITH WRITING SUPPLIES
(Doc. 6.)

N. ACOSTA, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20

I.

BACKGROUND

21

Krzysztof Wolinski ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

22

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on

23

April 3, 2015. (Doc. 1.) On June 15, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for the court to direct prison

24

officials to provide him with writing supplies. (Doc. 6.)

25

II.

FEDERAL COURT JURISDICTION

26

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, and as a preliminary matter, the court

27

must have before it an actual case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95,

28

102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation
1

1

of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 757-58 (1982); Jones v. City of

2

Los Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir. 2006). If the court does not have an actual case or

3

controversy before it, it has no power to hear the matter in question. Id. Thus, A[a] federal

4

court may issue an injunction [only] if it has personal jurisdiction over the parties and subject

5

matter jurisdiction over the claim; it may not attempt to determine the rights of persons not

6

before the court.@ Zepeda v. United States Immigration Service, 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir.

7

1985).

8

Discussion

9

Plaintiff is presently incarcerated at Salinas Valley State Prison (SVSP) in Soledad,

10

California. Plaintiff seeks a court order requiring prison officials at SVSP to provide him with

11

writing supplies. This case was filed against correctional officers at Corcoran State Prison, for

12

confiscating Plaintiff’s prescription glasses. Therefore, the order Plaintiff seeks would require

13

present actions by persons who are not defendants in this action and would not remedy any of

14

the claims upon which this action proceeds. Accordingly, the court lacks jurisdiction to issue

15

the order sought by Plaintiff, and Plaintiff=s motion must be denied.

16

III.

CONCLUSION

17

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff=s motion for a court

18

order directing prison officials at SVSP to provide him with writing supplies, filed on June 15,

19

2015, is DENIED for lack of jurisdiction.

20
21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 31, 2015

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2