Randle v. Prisoner Transportation Services et al
Filing
4
OPINION AND ORDER denying 3 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller, Jr on 11/07/2016. (cc: Randle) (nae)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
ANWAR RANDLE,
Plaintiff,
v.
PRISONER TRANSPORTATION
SERVICES (PTS), et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CAUSE NO. 3:16-CV-745
OPINION AND ORDER
Anwar Randle, a pro se prisoner, filed a petition asking the court to issue
a Temporary Restraining Order. He wants an order preventing the St. Louis
County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office and the St. Louis County Police
Department from hiring a private company to transport him to St. Louis,
Missouri, if they seek to extradite him on an outstanding warrant. “A preliminary
injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy; it is never awarded as of
right.” Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 689-690 (2008) (quotation marks and
citations omitted). “[A] preliminary injunction . . . should not be granted unless
the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of persuasion.” Mazurek v.
Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997). “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary
injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is
likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the
balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public
interest.” Winter v. NRDC, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Obtaining a temporary
restraining order without prior notice to the adverse party requires the movant
to satisfy an even higher standard, by showing “that immediate and irreparable
injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be
heard in opposition.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1)(A). Mr. Randle hasn’t met this
standard.
First, he hasn’t met the standard for a TRO because he hasn’t shown that
his will suffer an immediate loss. He speculates that he might be extradited, but
he has presented no evidence indicating that he will be extradited – nor any
evidence that he would be transported by a private company. Second, though he
alleges that he was injured while being transported in the past, he has presented
no evidence that he would be injured were her transported by a private company
in the future. But most impoortantly, he can’t demonstrate that he has any
likelihood of success on the merits of these claims. Mr. Randle wants an
injunction against the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office and the St.
Louis County Police Department. Neither of them are defendants in this case.
Moreover, because they are both located in St. Louis, Missouri, they can’t be
added as defendants because this isn’t the proper federal judicial district for a
suit against them.
For these reasons, the motion (DE 3) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
ENTERED: November 7, 2016.
/s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr.
Judge
United States District Court
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?