(PC) Pierce v. Unknown, No. 1:2015cv00650 - Document 27 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Regarding 23 Motion for Injunctive Relief, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 10/5/15, referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R Due Within Thirty Days. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SEAVON PIERCE, 12 13 Case No. 1:15-cv-00650 LJO DLB PC Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF v. 14 PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, et al., 15 Defendants. [ECF No. 23] 16 17 Plaintiff Seavon Pierce (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 18 forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on 19 November 12, 2014, in the Sacramento Division of the United States District Court for the 20 Eastern District of California. The matter was designated as a civil rights action. Plaintiff filed a 21 First Amended Complaint on December 9, 2014. He filed a Second Amended Complaint on 22 December 15, 2014. On April 28, 2015, the case was transferred to the Fresno Division. By 23 separate order, the Court has screened and dismissed the Second Amended Complaint, with 24 leave to file a Third Amended Complaint. 25 On September 28, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for injunctive relief. Plaintiff asks that 26 the Court enjoin Defendants from obstructing justice, illegally confiscating mail, and concealing 27 evidence. 28 A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right. Winter v. 1 1 Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008) (citation omitted). For each 2 form of relief sought in federal court, Plaintiff must establish standing. Summers v. Earth Island 3 Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493 (2009) (citation omitted); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 4 969 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted). This requires Plaintiff to show that he is under threat of 5 suffering an injury in fact that is concrete and particularized; the threat must be actual and 6 imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; it must be fairly traceable to challenged conduct of the 7 defendant; and it must be likely that a favorable judicial decision will prevent or redress the 8 injury. Summers, 555 U.S. at 493 (quotation marks and citation omitted); Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 9 969. Further, any award of equitable relief is governed by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 10 which provides in relevant part, “Prospective relief in any civil action with respect to prison 11 conditions shall extend no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right of a 12 particular plaintiff or plaintiffs. The court shall not grant or approve any prospective relief 13 unless the court finds that such relief is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to 14 correct the violation of the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the 15 violation of the Federal right.” 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A). 16 Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint has been screened and dismissed by separate 17 order. Until Plaintiff files an Amended Complaint raising claims which are cognizable and 18 appropriately raised in this action, the Court lacks jurisdiction to issue any preliminary 19 injunctions. 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A); Summers, 555 U.S. at 493; Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969. 20 21 RECOMMENDATION For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s 22 motion for preliminary injunction be DENIED. 23 These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 24 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty (30) 25 days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any party may file written 26 objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 27 “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections 28 shall be served and filed within ten (10) days after service of the objections. The parties are 2 1 advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the 2 District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir.1991). 3 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Dennis October 5, 2015 L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 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.