Thomas v. Grounds et al

Filing 27

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken DENYING 19 MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND TO INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/29/2014)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

Plaintiff,

5
v.

6
7

Case No.: C 13-4367 CW (PR)

EDWARD THOMAS,

R.T.C. GROUNDS, et al.,
Defendants.

8

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND TO
INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL
DEFENDANTS
Doc. no. 19

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

INTRODUCTION

11

Plaintiff Edward Thomas, a state prisoner incarcerated at the

12

California State Prison at Corcoran (CSP-COR), has filed a pro se

13

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the

14

violation of his constitutional rights by prison officials at

15

Salinas Valley State Prison (SVSP), where he was formerly

16

incarcerated.

17
18

On April 11, 2014, the Court issued an order

serving cognizable claims.

On July 10, 2014, Plaintiff filed a

motion to add employees at CSP-COR as defendants in this lawsuit
and for preliminary and permanent injunctions against them.

19
Defendants have filed an opposition.
20

below, Plaintiff's motion is denied.

21
22
23

For the reasons discussed

DISCUSSION
I.

Adding Defendants to this Action
Plaintiff asserts that employees at CSP-COR are violating his

24

constitutional rights by forcing him to accept "incompatible"

25

inmates as cellmates and seeks to add these employees as

26

defendants in this action.

27

these individuals is improper under Federal Rule of Civil

28

Procedure 20(a)(2).

Defendants argue that the joinder of

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2) provides that all

1
2

persons may be joined in one action as defendants if:

3

right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in

4

the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same

5

transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences;

6

and (B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will

7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

arise in the action."

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

have similar factual backgrounds and have common issues of law or
fact.

25
26

Coughlin v. Rogers, 130 F.3d 1348, 1350-51 (9th Cir. 1997).
Plaintiff's assertions against the CSA-COR individuals

support the same Eighth Amendment unsafe conditions claim that
Plaintiff asserts in his complaint.

Thus, there are common issues

of law, satisfying the joinder requirement in Rule 20(a)(2)(B).
However, Plaintiff's motion alleges violations by the CSA-COR
individuals that do not arise out of the same transaction,
occurrence or series of transactions or occurrences as his claim
against the SVSP Defendants.

Thus, the joinder requirement in

Rule 20(a)(2)(A) is not met and joinder of the CSP-COR individuals
to the present lawsuit would be improper.

Plaintiff's motion to

add them as defendants is DENIED.1
II. Preliminary Injunction
Because Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction is

23
24

Put simply, claims against different

parties may be joined together in one complaint only if the claims

11
12

"(A) any

directed at individuals at CSP-COR, who are not parties to this
1

Plaintiff may, but is not required to, bring a separate action
against these individuals in the Eastern District of California,
the venue in which CSP-COR is located.

27
28
2

1

action, the motion for a preliminary injunction is DENIED without

2

prejudice so that Plaintiff may re-submit it if he files an action

3

against them in the Eastern District.

4

(injunction is binding only on parties to the action, their

5

officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys).

6

same reason, Plaintiff's request for a permanent injunction is

7

DENIED without prejudice.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

For the

CONCLUSION

8
9

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)

Based on the foregoing, the Court orders as follows:
1. Plaintiff's motion to add defendants and for preliminary
and permanent injunctions is DENIED.

12

2. This order terminates docket number 19.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15

Dated:

8/29/2014
________________________
CLAUDIA WILKEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3