Sykes v. Gould et al

Filing 15

ORDER Denying 14 Plaintiff's Motion Requesting Injunctive Relief Against Non-Party Custodian. Signed by Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy, Jr. (MacKay, K)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DORIAN TREVOR SYKES Plaintiff, v. GOULD, et al., Case No. 21-10514 Bernard A. Friedman United States District Judge Curtis Ivy, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge Defendants. ______________________________/ ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION REQUESTING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST NON-PARTY CUSTODIAN (ECF No. 14) Plaintiff Dorian Trevor Sykes initiated this civil rights action on February 24, 2021, without the assistance of counsel. (ECF No. 1). On April 14, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting this Court issue an order directing the Bureau of Prisons and the Warden of USP-Coleman II, non-parties in the current action, to return the operative complaint in the above-captioned case to Plaintiff following its alleged removal from his possession. (ECF No. 14, PageID.59). Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief against the Bureau of Prisons and the Warden of USP-Coleman II is DENIED as Plaintiff is seeking relief against parties who are not named in the current action. Cummings v. Klee, 2018 WL 2693985, at *2 (E.D. Mich. June 5, 2018) (Plaintiff’s objections to report and recommendation denied as Plaintiff’s requests for injunctive relief were neither sought against defendants named in the current action nor related to the factual bases of the complaint); see Bloodworth v. Timmerman-Cooper, 2011 WL 4573943, at *2 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 29, 2011), report and recommendation adopted, 2011 WL 5403217 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 8, 2011) (Plaintiff’s request for relief against officials not party to the present suit for tampering with his mail was denied as unrelated to the complaint and the court noted that it lacked jurisdiction over officials who were not named parties). IT IS SO ORDERED. The parties to this action may object to and seek review of this Order, but are required to file any objections within 14 days of service as provided for in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a) and Local Rule 72.1(d). A party may not assign as error any defect in this Order to which timely objection was not made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). Any objections are required to specify the part of the Order to which the party objects and state the basis of the objection. When an objection is filed to a magistrate judge’s ruling on a non-dispositive motion, the ruling remains in full force and effect unless and until it is stayed by the magistrate judge or a district judge. E.D. Mich. Local Rule 72.2. Date: April 28, 2021 s/Curtis Ivy, Jr. Curtis Ivy, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on April 28, 2021, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail. s/Kristen MacKay Case Manager (810) 341-7850 3

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?