Streater v. Allen et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order 57 is DENIED. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 3/27/17. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHARON ALLEN, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:15-CV-68
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Theodore Streater, an inmate previously confined at the Eastham Unit of the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Prisoner Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc, against Sharon Allen, Charles
Bell, Sergeant Bunnell, T. Hall, S. Crowley, and Ms. Jones. The defendants are employed at the
Plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order. Plaintiff seeks a restraining order
preventing the defendants from retaliating against him and harassing him.
A party seeking a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction must establish the
following elements: (1) there is a substantial likelihood the party will prevail on the merits; (2) a
substantial threat exists that irreparable harm will result if the injunction is not granted; (3) the
threatened injury outweighs the threatened harm to the defendants; and (4) the granting of the
preliminary injunction will not disserve the public interest. Karaha Bodas Co. v. Perusahaan
Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara; 335 F.3d 357, 363 (5th Cir. 2003). Relief should
be granted only if the party seeking relief has clearly carried the burden of persuasion as to all four
elements. Karaha Bodas Co., 335 F.3d at 363; Black Fire Fighters Association v. City of Dallas,
905 F.2d 63, 64 (5th Cir. 1990); Mississippi Power & Light v. United Gas Pipe Line, 760 F.2d 618,
621 (5th Cir. 1985).
Plaintiff complains about being mistreated at the Eastham Unit. However, plaintiff is no
longer confined at that facility. Plaintiff’s transfer to another prison unit has rendered his claims for
injunctive relief moot. Cooper v. Sheriff, Lubbock County, Texas, 929 F.2d 1078, 1084 (5th Cir.
1991). As a result, plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief should be denied. It is accordingly
ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order (document no. 57) is
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 27th day of March, 2017.
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?