LOCKHART v. BUREAU OF PRISONS et al

Filing 32

Entry Denying Motion for Temporary Restraining Order - In his motion for a temporary restraining order, the plaintiff alleges that as part of a change in policy, the prison removed a computer from his housing unit and now the plaintiff must go to the law library to use a computer for research. The plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order [dkt. 28] is denied because the plaintiff has not shown irreparable harm and it is not in the public interest to issue a preliminary injunction under these circumstances. (See Entry.) Copy to plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/23/2014. (RSF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION
BOBBY SHAWN LOCKHART,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:14-cv-106-JMS-DKL

Entry Denying Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
In his motion for a temporary restraining order, the plaintiff alleges that as part of a change
in policy, the prison removed a computer from his housing unit and now the plaintiff must go to
the law library to use a computer for research. The housing unit computers were only intended for
account information and correspondence, and were never intended for purposes of research. The
plaintiff alleges that the removal of the computer from his housing unit has made it more difficult
for him to maintain and bring his claims.
To succeed in obtaining preliminary injunctive relief, the plaintiff must establish that he is
likely to succeed on the merits, he is likely to suffer irreparable harm if preliminary relief is not
granted, the balance of equities tips in his favor, and it is in the public interest to issue an injunction.
United States v. NCR Corp., 688 F.3d 833, 837 (7th Cir. 2012). The prison has not removed all
computers. The law library is still available to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s access to the courts is
not barred by this policy change.

The plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order [dkt. 28] is denied because the
plaintiff has not shown irreparable harm and it is not in the public interest to issue a preliminary
injunction under these circumstances.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
September 23, 2014
Date: __________________

Distribution:
Bobby Shawn Lockhart
07012-298
Gilmer FCI
Inmate Mail/Parcels
P.O. Box 6000
Glenville, WV 26351

_______________________________
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana