Tagle v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 33

ORDER Denying 10 Motion for TRO.; Denying 11 Motion for Sanctions; Denying 13 Motion for Default Judgment; Denying 22 Motion ; Denying 24 Motion. FURTHER ORDERED that defendants must file their updated status report in compliance with 6/10/2016 order [ECF No. 8] by 8/19/2016. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/17/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4

Victor Tagle,
2:15-cv-01402-JAD-VCF

5

Plaintiff
Order Denying Motions and Ordering
Respondents to File Updated Status
Report

6

v.

7

State of Nevada, et al.,
[ECF Nos. 10, 11, 13, 22, 24]

8

Defendants

9
10

Nevada state prisoner Victor Tagle sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for civil-rights violations he

11

alleges occurred during his incarceration at Nevada’s High Desert State Prison and Ely State Prison.

12

On March 28, 2016, I screened Tagle’s complaint, dismissed some claims with prejudice, permitted

13

others to proceed, and stayed the case to allow the parties a chance to settle their dispute.1 On

14

August 5, 2016, the parties participated in a mediation session but were unable to reach a settlement.2

15
16

On the eve of the mediation conference, August 4, 2016, Tagle filed a motion for a temporary

17

restraining order, motion for sanctions, and a motion for default judgment.3 He then filed a motion

18

to be removed from the jurisdiction of the Nevada Department of Corrections4 and another motion

19

for default judgment.5 I deny each of Tagle’s pending motions and order the respondents to file an

20

updated status report by August 19, 2016.

21
22
23
1

ECF No. 2.

2

ECF No. 19.

26

3

ECF Nos. 10, 11, 13.

27

4

ECF No. 22.

28

5

ECF No. 24.

24
25

Page 1 of 4

1

A.

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order

2

In support of his request for a TRO, Tagle alleges the following: from February 2012 through

3

May 2015, Tagle suffered “daily abuses” from Defendant Guard Wing.6 In May 2016, Wing

4

attacked Tagle by grabbing him by the neck and banging him into the wall and twisting his arms.7

5

Tagle has been in the hole since Wing accused Tagle of attacking him in May 2016.8 On July 18,

6

2016, Tagle woke up in segregation to see Wing “sadistically” smiling at him while handling Tagle’s

7

food tray.9 Tagle told another guard that he did not want Wing handling his food but Wing continues

8

to handle Tagle’s food.10 Tagle refuses to eat his food because Wing handles it.11 Additionally, the

9

NDOC will not schedule Tagle a doctor’s appointment.12 Other inmates have told Tagle that Wing is

10

“looking for an opportunity to physically abuse [him] in retaliation for the lawsuit.”13 Tagle knows

11

that Wing will attack him and then accuse him of attacking Wing.14 On July 27, 2016, Tagle

12

discovered that Wing had taken documents from his cell while he was in a caseworker’s office.15

13

Tagle seeks a restraining order against Wing and an order to stop the NDOC from daily retaliatory

14

abuses.16

15
16
17

6

ECF No. 10 at 2.

18

7

Id. at 3.

19

8

Id.

9

Id. at 3–4.

20
21

10

Id. at 4.

11

Id.

12

Id.

13

Id.

26

14

Id.

27

15

Id. at 5.

28

16

Id.

22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 4

1

Injunctive relief, whether temporary or permanent, is an “extraordinary remedy, never

2

awarded as of right.”17 “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely

3

to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary

4

relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.”18

5

And under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, preliminary injunctive relief must be “narrowly drawn,”

6

must “extend no further than necessary to correct the harm,” and must be “the least intrusive means

7

necessary to correct the harm.”19

8
9

Tagle has not met the demanding standard for preliminary injunctive relief. Tagle’s motion
does not show that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief. For

10

example, Tagle does not allege that Wing has recently threatened him or that he has contaminated or

11

altered Tagle’s food so that it would be harmful to Tagle if he ate it. Tagle also has not shown a

12

likelihood of success on the merits. Accordingly, Tagle’s motion for a TRO is denied.

13

B.

14

Other motions
Tagle’s motion for sanctions against the Deputy Attorney General is frivolous: he argues that

15

he is entitled to sanctions because the AG refused to agree to Tagle’s settlement terms before the

16

scheduled inmate mediation conference. This is not an appropriate basis for sanctions. Tagle’s

17

motions for default judgment are also frivolous. In the first, Tagle seeks defaults against defendants

18

State of Nevada, NDOC, and NDOC employees for failure to defend.20 My screening order

19

permitted certain claims to proceed against defendants Nash, Bean, Wing, and Oliver only; the

20

NDOC defendants Tagle names are no longer parties to this case, and I cannot enter default judgment

21

against them. Tagle’s second motion for default seeks default against defendants for “misconduct,

22

unprofessionalism, discrimination, [and] racism,” none of which are proper reasons for granting

23
24

17

25

18

Winter v. Natural Res. Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008).

26

Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting
Winter, 555 U.S. at 20).

27

19

18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(2).

28

20

ECF No. 13.
Page 3 of 4

1

default judgment.21 Finally, Tagle’s motion to be removed from the jurisdiction of the Nevada

2

Department of Corrections is legally unsupported, and I deny it on that basis.22

3

Conclusion

4
5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Tagle’s pending motions [ECF Nos. 10, 11,
13, 22, 24] are DENIED.

6
7

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants must file their updated status report in
compliance with my June 10, 2016, order [ECF No. 8] by August 19, 2016.

8

Dated this 17th day of August, 2016

9

_________________________________
_______________________
_ _______ __ _
__
Jennifer A. Dorsey
nnifer A
i
United States District Judge
nited States
d at
ct Jud
t udge
d

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

21

ECF No. 24.

28

22

ECF No. 22.
Page 4 of 4