O'Keefe v. Cate

Filing 209

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/14/2015 RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's 203 motion for injunctive relief be denied. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TIMOTHY O’KEEFE, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:11-cv-2659 KJM KJN P v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS JERRY BROWN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 17 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s May 6, 2015 motion for injunctive 19 relief. (ECF No. 203.) For the following reasons, this motion should be denied. 20 This action is proceeding on the fifth amended complaint filed November 14, 2014. (ECF 21 No. 171). Plaintiff alleges that defendants have failed to provide him with adequate mental health 22 care for exhibitionism, voyeurism and paraphilia. (Id. at 4.) Plaintiff requests injunctive relief in 23 the form of an order directing defendants to provide him with treatment for these conditions. (Id. 24 at 14.) 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 1 In the pending motion for injunctive relief, plaintiff seeks an order preventing defendants 2 from elevating his level of mental health care treatment from “CCCMS” to “EOP.” (ECF No. 3 203 at 2.) Plaintiff alleges that the EOP level of care is not appropriate for him. (Id.) Plaintiff 4 alleges that half of the prisoners who are EOP are low functioning and plaintiff cannot relate to 5 them. (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff alleges that the other half of prisoners who are EOP are “playing” in 6 order to be at that level of care. (Id.) 7 In order to obtain injunctive relief, plaintiff must establish the following: 1) he is likely to 8 succeed on the merits; 2) he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary 9 relief; 3) the balance of equities tips in his favor; and 4) an injunction is in the public interest. 10 11 Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate how the subject matter of his pending motion for 12 injunctive relief has any bearing on his likelihood of success on the merits of his underlying 13 claim. A plaintiff seeking injunctive relief must show “[a] relationship between the injury 14 claimed in the party’s motion and the conduct asserted in the complaint.” Devose v. Harrington, 15 42 F.3d 470, 471 (8th Cir. 1994). Plaintiff has not demonstrated how his claim alleging that the 16 EOP level of care is not appropriate for him is related to the claim on which this action is 17 proceeding, i.e., defendants are not providing him with adequate treatment for voyeurism, 18 exhibitionism and paraphilia. Because the conduct plaintiff seeks to enjoin appears to have no 19 bearing on plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits, the pending motion for injunctive relief 20 should be denied. 21 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 203) be denied. 23 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 24 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 25 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 26 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 27 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 28 objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 2 1 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 2 appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 Dated: May 14, 2015 4 5 6 Ok2659.tro 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?