(PC) Mathis v. Chokatos et al, No. 1:2012cv00329 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS for Denial of 15 MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 12/27/12. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections Due Within Fourteen Days. (Gonzalez, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Mathis v. Chokatos et al Doc. 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 BENNIE MATHIS, Plaintiff, 10 11 12 CASE NO. 1:12-cv-00329-LJO-MJS PC FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DENIAL OF MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION v. J. CHOKATOS, M.D., et al., (ECF No. 15) 13 Defendants. OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS 14 / 15 16 Plaintiff Bennie Mathis (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 17 pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 29, 2012. 18 On October 15, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a preliminary injunction requiring 19 prison officials to provide him with certain accommodations for his disabilities. 20 As a threshold matter, Plaintiff must establish that he has standing to seek 21 preliminary injunctive relief. Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493 (2009) 22 (citation omitted); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation 23 omitted). Plaintiff “must show that he is under threat of suffering an ‘injury in fact’ that is 24 concrete and particularized; the threat must be actual and imminent, not conjectural or 25 hypothetical; it must be fairly traceable to challenged conduct of the defendant; and it must 26 be likely that a favorable judicial decision will prevent or redress the injury.” Summers, 55 27 U.S. at 493 (citation omitted); Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969. 28 The medical care claims set forth in Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint arise 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 from events which occurred at Pleasant Valley State Prison in 2011. Plaintiff is no longer 2 incarcerated at Pleasant Valley State Prison. Injunctive relief directed toward that facility 3 would have no effect on Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s claims arise from long-past events. He has no 4 claim pending relating to his current conditions of confinement at San Quentin State Prison 5 in San Quentin, California. Plaintiff does not identify an ongoing threat of harm to him at 6 either facility. Accordingly, the Court hereby RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff’s motion for a 7 8 preliminary injunction (ECF No. 15.) be DENIED. 9 These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District 10 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 11 Within fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, 12 any party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such 13 a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and 14 Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten days 15 after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within 16 the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Y1 17 st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 18 19 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: ci4d6 December 27, 2012 Michael J. Seng /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
