Deeds v. Aranas et al

Filing 14

ORDERED that the # 6 Motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that the # 9 Motion to file the civil rights complaint is DENIED as MOOT. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 7/9/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

13

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
ROMEO ARANAS et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
___________________________________ )

14

I.

8
9
10
11
12

RICHARD DEEDS,

3:14-cv-138-RCJ-WGC
ORDER

DISCUSSION

15

On April 28, 2014, this Court issued a screening order dismissing Plaintiff’s deliberate

16

indifference to serious medical needs claims (Counts I and II), with prejudice, because Plaintiff

17

had disagreed with physicians about the course of treatment he should receive. (ECF No. 7

18

at 3-5). The Court found that Plaintiff had stated a colorable claim for due process violations

19

(Count III). (Id. at 6-7).

20

On April 21, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 6).

21

Plaintiff requested that defendants be enjoined from discontinuing the codeine and low-fat diet

22

that he currently received. (Id. at 5).

23

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

24

awarded as of right.” Winter v. Natural Res. Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008). “A

25

plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the

26

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

27

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

28

Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting
Winter, 555 U.S. at 20). Furthermore, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”),

1

preliminary injunctive relief must be “narrowly drawn,” must “extend no further than necessary

2

to correct the harm,” and must be “the least intrusive means necessary to correct the harm.”

3

18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(2).

4

The Court denies Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction. Pursuant to the screening

5

order, Plaintiff fails to state claims for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. As

6

such, Plaintiff cannot establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits of his Eighth

7

Amendment claims.

8

The Court also denies as moot Plaintiff’s request that the Court file his civil rights

9

complaint. (ECF No. 9). The Clerk of the Court filed Plaintiff’s complaint on April 28, 2014.

10

(See ECF No. 8).

11

II.

12
13
14
15

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for preliminary injunction

(ECF No. 6) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to file the civil rights complaint (ECF No.
9) is DENIED as MOOT.

16
17

Dated: This 9th day ofday of 2014. 2014.
DATED: This _____ July, April,

18
19

_________________________________
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2