Schuett v. US Marshal Service et al
Filing
16
ORDER that 12 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 7/17/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
8
CLIFFORD JAMES SCHUETT,
9
10
11
12
13
2:13-CV-1063 JCM (GWF)
Plaintiff(s),
v.
UNITED STATES MARSHAL
SERVICE, et al.,
Defendant(s).
14
15
16
17
ORDER
Presently before the court is pro se prisoner plaintiff Clifford James Schuett’s motion for a
temporary restraining order. (Doc. # 12).
18
According to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, a court may issue a temporary restraining
19
order when the moving party provides specific facts showing that immediate and irreparable injury,
20
loss, or damage will result before the adverse party’s opposition to a motion for preliminary
21
injunction can be heard. Fed. R. Civ. P.65. “The purpose of a temporary restraining order is to
22
preserve the status quo before a preliminary injunction hearing may be held; its provisional remedial
23
nature is designed merely to prevent irreparable loss of rights prior to judgment.” Miller v. Rufion,
24
No. 08-1233, 2009 WL 348176, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2009) (citing Sierra On-Line, Inc. v.
25
Phoenix Software, Inc., 739 F.2d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1984). “Thus, in seeking a temporary
26
restraining order, the movant must demonstrate that the denial of relief will expose him to some
27
significant risk of irreparable injury.” Id. (quoting Associated Gen. Contractors of California v.
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
1
Coalition of Economic Equity, 950 F.2d 1401, 1410 (9th Cir. 1991).1
2
Plaintiff has filed the instant temporary restraining order because he alleges that his sleeping
3
arrangements are dangerous. He must sleep on a bed with no safety bars and is danger of falling off
4
the bed when he sleeps.
5
Plaintiff must establish real and immediate irreparable harm before this court may grant a
6
temporary restraining order. Plaintiff has not met that high burden. Based on the facts presented,
7
plaintiff’s alleged injuries do not establish the requisite immediacy to warrant a temporary restraining
8
order. Temporary restraining orders are mechanism for the court to deal with real, immediate, and
9
serious risks and injuries. This motion simply does not rise to that level, and the court further finds
10
that there is not a high enough likelihood of success on the merits to grant a temporary restraining
11
order.
12
When considering penological interests, the court should first determine the reasonableness
13
of the regulation. See Turner v. Safely, 482 U.S. 78, 89-90 (1987). Because plaintiff filed the instant
14
motion seeking a temporary restraining order, the prison has not yet had the opportunity to justify
15
the challenged policies. (See doc. # 12). However, plaintiff also filed the exact same motion seeking
16
a permanent injunction. (Doc. # 13). The court finds it appropriate to permit the prison to respond
17
to these allegations via the normal briefing schedule of a permanent injunction.
18
Accordingly,
19
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s motion for a
20
21
temporary restraining order (doc. # 12) be, and the same hereby, is DENIED.
DATED July 17, 2013.
22
23
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
1
The Supreme Court has stated that courts must consider the following factors in determining whether to issue
a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction: (1) a likelihood of success on the merits; (2) likelihood of
irreparable injury if preliminary relief is not granted; (3) balance of hardships; and (4) advancement of the public interest.
Winter v. N.R.D.C., 129 S. Ct. 365, 374–76 (2008).
-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?