Mitchell v. Beard et al

Filing 10

ORDER denying 4 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and granting 9 Motion to Dismiss Defendants signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 11/3/2015. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JOHN E. MITCHELL,

11

Plaintiff,

12

v.

13

J. BEARD, et al.,

14

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:15-cv-01512 DLB PC
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
[ECF No. 4]
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
DEFENDANTS
[ECF No. 9]

15
Plaintiff John E. Mitchell, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed

16

1
17 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 5, 2015. On October 8, 2015,

18 Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction. On October 27, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion
19 to dismiss certain defendants from his complaint.
The motion for preliminary injunction must be denied. As a threshold matter, Plaintiff

20

21 must demonstrate he has standing to seek preliminary injunctive relief. Summers v. Earth Island
22 Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493, 129 S.Ct. 1142 (2009); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969
23 (9th Cir. 2010). “[The] triad of injury in fact, causation, and redressability constitutes the core of
24 Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement, and the party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the
25 burden of establishing its existence.” Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83, 103-04,
26 118 S.Ct. 1003 (1998); Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61, 112 S.Ct. 2130
27 (1992). This requires Plaintiff to “show that he is under threat of suffering an ‘injury in fact’ that
28

1

Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge on October 16, 2015.

1 is concrete and particularized; the threat must be actual and imminent, not conjectural or
2 hypothetical; it must be fairly traceable to challenged conduct of the defendant; and it must be
3 likely that a favorable judicial decision will prevent or redress the injury.” Summers, 555 U.S. at
4 493; Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969.
5

This action arises out of alleged violations of Plaintiff’s federal rights on March 13, 2014,

6 while Plaintiff was temporarily detained at North Kern State Prison (“NKSP”) in Delano,
7 California. Plaintiff claims that Defendants at NKSP violated his Fourth Amendment right to
8 privacy during a strip search, and his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual
9 punishment for the use of certain restraints, for conditions of confinement, and for denial of
10 medical care. The pendency of this case does not provide Plaintiff with standing to seek relief
11 directed at possible future uses of force, complaints of double housing and confinement away from
12 his family, refusals to provide a religious diet, unlawful confiscations or disposals of his personal
13 property, improper information contained in his C-File, harassment, or interferences with access to
14 courts by individuals at Corcoran State Prison. Summers, 555 U.S. at 493 (citation omitted);
15 Lujan, 504 U.S. at 560-61; Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969. Plaintiff’s inability to meet the “irreducible
16 constitutional minimum of standing” with respect to the relief he seeks is fatal to his motion.
17

On October 27, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the following named Defendants

18 from his complaint: Sgt. J. Amaya; C/O Huewe; C/O Alford; Gonzalez; Lieutenant Tenorio; C/O
19 Rodriguez, and C.R.M. Robicheaux. Plaintiff claims he has not exhausted his claims against these
20 Defendants. Good cause having been presented, the Court will grant Plaintiff’s motion.
21
22

ORDER
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction

23 is DENIED, and his motion to dismiss Defendants Amaya, Huewe, Alford, Gonzalez, Tenorio,
24 Rodriguez, and Robicheaux is GRANTED.
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

November 3, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2