Crane v. Rodriguez et al

Filing 62

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 09/12/16 ordering that plaintiff's 08/19/16 request 61 is denied. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RICHARD JOSEPH CRANE,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:15-cv-0208 TLN KJN P

v.

ORDER

RODRIGUEZ, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. This action was stayed for 90 days based

18

on the referral to the post-screening ADR pilot project, and the parties were advised that except as

19

provided by court order, no other pleadings or other documents may be filed in this case during

20

the stay of this action. (ECF No. 53.) The stay was extended on August 17, 2016, in light of the

21

settlement conference scheduled for September 22, 2016.1 (ECF No. 60.)

22

On August 19, 2016, plaintiff filed a request for leave of court to file a motion for

23

injunctive relief under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651. (ECF No. 61.) Plaintiff, now housed

24

at the California State Prison, Los Angeles County (“CSP-LAC”), claims that on July 12, 2016,

25

he was assaulted by his cellmate and suffered serious injuries, including a broken nose, fractured

26
27
28

1

On June 10, 2016, a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum was issued to the Warden at CSPLAC, requiring plaintiff’s attendance at the September 22 settlement conference. (ECF No. 59.)
Plaintiff does not claim that he is unable to attend due to his recent injuries.
1

1

orbital socket, and injury to the vision in his right eye, the only eye in which he has vision (he

2

was born blind in his left eye). Plaintiff asserts that guards did not sound an alarm, and his

3

cellmate was not punished for the assault. Plaintiff avers that his administrative appeal was

4

rejected on August 5, 2016, and a correctional officer told plaintiff that as of August 11, 2016,

5

there is no record of the assault. Plaintiff does not identify the relief sought.

6

This action proceeds on plaintiff’s First and Eighth Amendment claims against defendants

7

Davey, Rodriguez, Robinette, Weeks, Barton, and Probst while plaintiff was housed at High

8

Desert State Prison from 2009-2013. The issues raised in plaintiff’s request do not relate to the

9

pending claims and do not involve the defendants in this action. Moreover, plaintiff was

10

previously advised that “it is inappropriate to raise unrelated claims against different defendants

11

in one action, and that unrelated claims against different defendants must be pursued in multiple

12

lawsuits. (ECF Nos. 26 at 2; 6 at 3-4.) In addition, any federal civil rights claims plaintiff may

13

pursue based on the July 12, 2016 incident must be raised in the United States District Court for

14

the Central District of California because CSP-LAC is located in Lancaster, Los Angeles County,

15

California. This court has no jurisdiction over such claims. Thus, plaintiff’s request is denied.

16

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s August 19, 2016 request (ECF

17

No. 61) is denied.

18

Dated: September 12, 2016

19
20
cran0208.den

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2