(PC) Raymond Villa v. Vasquez et al, No. 1:2010cv01148 - Document 55 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Denial of Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief; ORDER GRANTING 53 Motion for Extension of Time, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 6/24/2014, referred to Judge Ishii. Thirty Day Deadline to File Objections to Findings and Recommendations; Thirty Day Deadline to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAYMOND VILLA, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. P.L. VASQUEZ, et al., 15 CASE No. 1:10-cv-01148-AWI-MJS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME MOTION FOR Defendants. (ECF No. 53) 16 OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS 17 18 19 Plaintiff Raymond Villa is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 20 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 17, 2014, 21 Plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to respond to Defendants’ pending 22 summary judgment motion. (ECF No. 53.) Plaintiff's motion also requests preliminary 23 injunctive relief. Plaintiff asks the Court to order Fresno County Jail officials to grant 24 Plaintiff access to a law library. (Id.) 25 I. EXTENSION OF TIME 26 Plaintiff has been confined in the Fresno County Jail, and the Defendants’ Motion 27 for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 52), filed May 30, 2014, was only recently forwarded 28 to him. Plaintiff requests an extension of time to secure his legal materials and prepare 1 1 an appropriate response. Good cause having been presented to the Court, Plaintiff will 2 be granted thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order in which to respond to 3 the pending motion for summary judgment. 4 II. 5 6 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief in the form of a court order requiring county jail officials to give Plaintiff access to a law library. 7 “A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right.” 8 Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008) (citation 9 omitted). “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to 10 succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of 11 preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in 12 the public interest.” Id. at 20 (citations omitted). An injunction may only be awarded 13 upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. Id. at 22 (citation omitted). 14 Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, and as a preliminary matter, the 15 court must have before it an actual case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 16 461 U.S. 95, 101-2 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of 17 Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471 (1982); Jones v. City of Los Angeles, 444 18 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir. 2006). 19 controversy before it, it has no power to hear the matter in question. Id. “A federal court 20 may issue an injunction if it has personal jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter 21 jurisdiction over the claim; it may not attempt to determine the rights of persons not 22 before the court.” Zepeda v. United States Immigration Service, 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th 23 Cir. 1985). If the court does not have an actual case or 24 This action is proceeding on Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against 25 officials at Wasco State Prison. Since no official from the Fresno County Jail, where 26 Plaintiff currently is incarcerated, is a party to this action, the Court has no jurisdiction to 27 order them to act as requested or otherwise. 28 /// 2 1 2 III. CONCLUSION The Court finds that Plaintiff has set forth good cause to justify a thirty day 3 extension of time. However, under the circumstances, Plaintiff is not entitled to 4 preliminary injunctive relief. 5 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for an extension of 6 time is GRANTED. Further, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's request for 7 preliminary injunctive relief be DENIED. 8 These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District 9 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 10 Within thirty (30) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, 11 any party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such 12 a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and 13 Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten (10) 14 days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections 15 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. 16 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir.1991). 17 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 24, 2014 /s/ Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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.