Jackson v. Patzkowski et al

Filing 66

ORDER denying 61 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Salvador Mendoza, Jr. (VR, Courtroom Deputy)**3 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Kyntrel Jackson, Prisoner ID: 355949)

1

FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

2

Oct 04, 2018

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SEAN F. M AVOY, CLERK
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

3

C

4
KYNTREL JACKSON,

No. 4:17-CV-05189-SMJ

5
Plaintiff,
6
7

v.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION

SHAWNA PATZKOWSKI and R.
ZARAGOZA,

8
Defendants.
9
10

Before the Court, without oral argument, is Plaintiff Kyntrel Jackson’s

11

Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 61. Plaintiff requests that the Court

12

reconsider its denial of his Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 58. On

13

September 26, 2018, the Court ordered Defendants to respond. ECF No. 62. On

14

October 2, 2018, Defendants responded. ECF No. 63.

15

As a preliminary matter, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration exceeds the

16

page limits imposed by the Court in its Scheduling Order. See ECF No. 54 at 9.

17

Given that the motion has been handwritten, especially by a pro se litigant, the Court

18

exercises leniency. However, Plaintiff is advised that future noncompliance with

19

the Court’s orders may result in prejudice. The Court now turns to the merits.

20

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 1

1

In its order denying Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction, the Court

2

concluded that it had no jurisdiction over the matter because the factual allegations

3

in Plaintiff’s motion had no nexus to the factual allegations underlying his First

4

Amendment and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act claims. ECF

5

No. 58 at 5; See Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen’s Med. Ctr., 810 F.3d 631,

6

635 (9th Cir. 2015). In his Amended Complaint, Plaintiff seeks only injunctive

7

relief to allow him to receive a Satanist ritual book. In his motion for

8

reconsideration, Plaintiff argues a nexus exists because his inability to receive his

9

legal mail prevents him from making arguments in furtherance of his underlying

10

claims. ECF No. 61 at 1.

11

The Court is unpersuaded. First, Plaintiff’s new argument that he is no longer

12

receiving his legal mail, as opposed to his original argument that the mailroom staff

13

was opening his mail, belies his own grievances to prison staff. See ECF No. 61 at

14

25–26. Second, Plaintiff’s likelihood of success in showing that Defendants did not

15

provide him his legal mail is low, and indeed, Plaintiff’s hearty participation in the

16

case demonstrates that he is receiving all filings, at least in this matter. Third,

17

Plaintiff does not demonstrate why the prison staff’s mistake in opening his mail,

18

see ECF No. 64, is connected to their denial of his Satanist book. And he cannot

19

show this because no such nexus exists.

20

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 2

1
2
3
4
5
6

Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 61, is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to enter this Order and
provide copies to Plaintiff and all counsel.
DATED this 4th day of October 2018.
___________________________________
SALVADOR MENDOZA, JR.
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 3