Woodfork v. Secretary et al

Filing 23

ORDER denying without prejudice 22 Petitioner's Motion for injunctive relief. Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara Lynn Major on 1/7/2010. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(tkl)(jrl).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JEFFREY ANTHONY WOODFORK, ) ) ) Petitioner, v. ) ) MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of the ) California Department of ) Corrections and Rehabilitation, ) ) Respondent. ) ) ) Case No. 09cv1543-JM (BLM) ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF [Doc. No. 22] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, is seeking habeas relief from this Court. His pending petition challenges his state court conviction of receiving stolen property. Respondent has filed an answer to the petition, Petitioner has filed a traverse, and the matter presently is under submission with the Court. On January 4, 2010, Petitioner filed a motion for injunctive relief. Doc. No. 22. Having reviewed the motion, the Court finds that it does not address any issue presented in Petitioner's pending habeas case. However, Petitioner mentions in the motion that he also has filed a civil complaint alleging sexual harassment during an unclothed body 09cv1543-JM (BLM) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 search conducted in prison. As the instant motion for injunctive relief appears to relate to that inci dent, the Court believes Petitioner may inadvertently have filed the instant motion before this Court instead of before the court hearing the civil rights complaint. For the foregoing reasons, the motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: January 7, 2010 BARBARA L. MAJOR United States Magistrate Judge 2 09cv1543-JM (BLM)

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?