Havens v. State of Colorado et al

Filing 30

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 28 Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 06/24/15.(nmarb, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03024-MSK-MEH
DARRELL HAVENS,
Plaintiff,
v.
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on June 24, 2015.
Plaintiff’s “Request [for] a Judge[‘s] Order for Immediate Preliminary Injunction & [for the]
DRDC [to] Let [him have] His Documents/Discovery in his Cell as He is Pro Se Pursuant to FRCP
65(a) [filed June 19, 2015; docket #28], construed as Plaintiff’s request for an order requiring the
Defendant to permit him to have more than one “banker’s box” of discovery documents in his cell,
is denied without prejudice. First, although Plaintiff cites to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a), he does not
address the elements necessary to justify a preliminary injunction. See Schrier v. Univ. of Colo., 427
F.3d 1253, 1258 (10th Cir. 2005) (“(1) the party will suffer irreparable injury unless the injunction
issues; (2) the threatened injury outweighs whatever damage the proposed injunction may cause the
opposing party; (3) the injunction, if issued, would not be adverse to the public interest; and (4) there
is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.”). Second, Plaintiff does not cite any legal
support for his request that the Court order Defendant to permit him to have more than one banker’s
box of discovery documents in his cell. D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.1(d).