Farha v. Silva et al
Filing
124
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 123 Motion for Court Order signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/16/2011. (Flores, E)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
MAUWAI FARHA,
10
CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00755-LJO-BAM PC
Plaintiff,
11
12
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
COURT ORDER
v.
B. SILVA, et al.,
13
(ECF NO. 123)
Defendants.
/
14
15
Plaintiff Mauwai Farha (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
16
in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, filed this action on February 6, 2006. The
17
case went to trial and judgment was entered for Defendants on October 17, 2011. On November 14,
18
2011, Plaintiff filed a motion for a court order directing the prison to provide him with Kosher
19
meals.
20
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and the Court is bound by the requirement
21
that as a preliminary matter, it have before it an actual case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v.
22
Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of
23
Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471 (1982). If the Court does not have an actual case or
24
controversy before it, it has no power to hear the matter in question. Id. The case or controversy
25
requirement cannot be met in light of the fact that the judgment has been entered and the case has
26
///
27
///
28
///
1
1
been closed. Because this case has been closed, the case-or-controversy requirement is not met such
2
that this action provides no basis upon which to award Plaintiff relief.
3
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for a court order is HEREBY DENIED.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
Dated:
b9ed48
November 16, 2011
/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
]]>
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?
