ROBINSON v. SOBINA et al

Filing 79

ORDER denying 75 Motion for TRO; denying 75 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, as more fully stated in the Order. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 4/02/2012. A copy of this Order was mailed to Plaintiff at his address of record. (dad)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ERIC ROBINSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
RAYMOND J. SOBINA, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 09-247
Judge Cathy Bissoon

ORDER
Eric Robinson (“Plaintiff”) is a state inmate currently incarcerated at the State
Correctional Institution at Huntingdon, Pennsylvania (“SCI-Huntingdon”). Plaintiff brings this
suit pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C § 1983, et seq. This suit was commenced
with the receipt of the initial complaint by this Court, as an attachment to Plaintiff’s motion for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on February 26, 2009. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff was
granted leave to proceed IFP, and the complaint was filed, on the following day. (Docs. 2 and
3).
Currently before this Court is Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order and
preliminary injunction. (Doc. 75). In this motion, it appears that Plaintiff seeks an order
enjoining non-party named “Christ M. Cook” from engaging in prison misconduct proceedings
against Plaintiff for events that took place at SCI-Huntingdon on or about March 26, 2012.
(Doc. 76 ¶¶ 1 and 2).

A. Analysis
Plaintiff’s allegations involve acts or omissions alleged to have occurred at SCIHuntingdon, which is located within territorial limits of the Middle District of Pennsylvania, by
1

an individual who is not a party to the instant lawsuit, and has not been served the complaint. As
such, this Court is without authority to issue an order compelling the individual named in the
motion to do anything. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 65(a)(1) (prohibiting a court from issuing a
preliminary injunction without advanced notice to parties).
Additionally, as these acts or omission took place well after the amended complaint was
filed, and involve an entirely new cast of alleged bad-actors, there is a lack of a factual nexus
between the allegations in this motion and the amended complaint, which precludes the grant of
injunctive relief. See, e.g., Piskanin v. Rendell, 2007 WL 4554258, at *1 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 19,
2007) (citing cases). Accordingly, this motion (Doc. 75) will be denied. Furthermore, to the
extent that Plaintiff wishes to seek relief from the federal courts for alleged acts or omissions that
took place at SCI-Huntingdon, he must file a new lawsuit in the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

AND NOW, this 2nd day of April, 2012,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order and
preliminary injunction (Doc. 75) is DENIED.
s/Cathy Bissoon
CATHY BISSOON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc:
ERIC ROBINSON
AM-6940
SCI at Huntingdon
1100 Pike Street
Huntingdon, PA 16654
(via ECF email notification):
All Counsel of Record
2