Coleman v. Virga et al

Filing 24

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/26/2018 RECOMMENDING plaintiff's 15 motion for injunctive relief be denied. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R 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 ROBERT COLEMAN, 12 No. 2:17-cv-0851 KJM KJN P Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 T. VIRGA, et al., 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 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 motion for injunctive relief. (ECF 19 No. 15.) For the reasons stated herein, the undersigned recommends that plaintiff’s motion be 20 denied. 21 Plaintiff is incarcerated at California State Prison-Los Angeles (“CSP-LA”). In the 22 pending motion, plaintiff seeks an order directing prison officials at CSP-LA to assign plaintiff to 23 single cell status. 24 The defendants in this action, i.e., Hinrich, Lynch, Virga, Haring, Wright, Curren and 25 Walcott, are located at California State Prison-Sacramento (“CSP-Sac”). (See ECF No. 13 26 (amended complaint). Thus, plaintiff seeks injunctive relief against individuals who are not 27 named as defendants in this action, i.e., prison officials at CSP-LA. This court is unable to issue 28 an order against individuals who are not parties to a suit pending before it. See Zenith Radio 1 1 2 3 Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 112 (1969). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 15) be denied. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 6 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 7 with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 8 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 9 failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 10 Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 Dated: March 26, 2018 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?