Thornton v. Fisher

Filing 58

ORDER Denying Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. No. 43 ). Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter C. Lewis on 3/14/2018. (dsn)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

William Thornton,

Case No.: 16cv2492 PCL
Petitioner,

12
13

v.

14

Raythel Fisher, Jr., Warden,
Respondent.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21

ORDER DENYING MOTION
FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION (Doc. 43.)

Plaintiff requests preliminary injunctive relief in order to be allowed to use the law
library more frequently than currently allowed by his prison. (Doc. 43, at 2.) Petitioner
states that he is only allowed to use the law library on Tuesdays for a two-hour period.
(Id.)
To prevail on a motion for preliminary injunction, the moving party must show either

22

“(1) a likelihood of success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury, or (2)

23

the existence of serious questions going to the merits and the balance of hardships tipping

24

in [the moving party’s] favor.” Oakland Tribune, Inc. v. Chronicle Publishing Co., Inc.,

25

762 F.2d 1374, 1376 (9th Cir. 1985) (citation omitted). The two formulations represent

26

two points on a sliding scale with the focal point being the degree of irreparable injury

27

shown. Oakland Tribune, 762 F.2d at 1376. “Under either formulation of the test,

28

plaintiff must demonstrate that there exists a significant threat of irreparable injury.” Id.
1
16cv2492 PCL

1

In the absence of a significant showing of irreparability, the court need not reach the issue

2

of likelihood of success on the merits. Id.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Plaintiff’s motion fails to meet the requirements for preliminary injunctive relief.
Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of
a preliminary injunction. An irreparable injury in this context would be prejudice Plaintiff
would suffer in existing or contemplated litigation, such as the failure to meet a filing
deadline due to inadequate access to the law library and/or his legal property. However,
Plaintiff has been given an adequate litigation timetable to file his motions and to conduct
his legal research. The Court has been generous in granting Plaintiff additional time to do
his legal research because of the constraints that he currently experiences as a prisoner.
Because Petitioner has effectively been given ample time to access the law library, the
Court denies Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief at this time.

14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: March 14, 2018

17
18
19

Peter C. Lewis
United States Magistrate Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

16cv2492 PCL