Hampton v. Haynie et al

Filing 20

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/26/2015 DENYING plaintiff's 19 motion, without prejudice. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMES HAMPTON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-2038 KJN P

v.

ORDER

R. HAYNIE, 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. Plaintiff has filed a second document styled, “Motion for Writ of Mandate

19

or to Impose Sanctions.” (ECF No. 19.) Plaintiff claims his property was taken from him on

20

November 30, 2014, and was not transferred with him when he was transferred to the California

21

State Prison in Lancaster. Plaintiff states that on January 27, 2015, Sgt. Bowen told plaintiff that

22

Bowen contacted High Desert State Prison (“HDSP”), and Bowen was informed that plaintiff’s

23

property “was coming.” (ECF No. 19 at 2.) Plaintiff claims this was a follow-up phone call from

24

a previous call on January 9, 2015. (Id.) By February 9, 2015, plaintiff still had not received his

25

property. (ECF No. 19 at 5.) In the appended request for interview form, Sgt. Bowen noted that

26

HDSP indicated on January 27, 2015, that plaintiff’s property “was not sent yet but it would be

27

sent.” (ECF No. 19 at 8.) Plaintiff arrived in Lancaster on January 8, 2015.

28

////
1

1

Plaintiff is advised that often inmates’ property is not transferred with the inmate, and it is

2

not uncommon for the delivery of property to be delayed. Plaintiff is not entitled to sanctions for

3

a delay in delivery of his property. Plaintiff should continue to seek return of his property

4

through prison officials, and may avail himself of the administrative appeal process should such

5

efforts prove unavailing. As plaintiff was previously informed, at the present time, no action on

6

plaintiff’s part is required in these proceedings, there are no legal deadlines pending. (ECF No.

7

13.) The U.S. Marshal is executing service of process on defendants. If plaintiff has not received

8

his property by the time defendants have filed an answer, plaintiff may seek the court’s

9

intervention at that time.

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 19) is denied

11

without prejudice.

12

Dated: February 26, 2015

13
14
15
16

/hamp2038.den2

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2