-KJN (PC) Jayne v. Van Buskirk, et al., No. 2:2011cv01448 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/5/2011 recommending that plaintiff's 11 motion for injunctive relief be denied ; referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell; Objections due within twenty-one days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Duong, D)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-KJN (PC) Jayne v. Van Buskirk, et al. Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MIKE JAYNE, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. 2: 11-cv-1448 GEB KJN P vs. DONALD VAN BUSKIRK, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 Plaintiff is proceeding with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On 17 June 28, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for injunctive relief. This motion concerns conditions at 18 the Shasta County Jail, where plaintiff was incarcerated when he filed the motion. Court records 19 indicate that plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at the Shasta County Jail. Plaintiff is now 20 incarcerated at the Snake River Correctional Institution in Ontario, Oregon. 21 When an inmate seeks injunctive relief concerning an institution at which he is no 22 longer incarcerated, his claims for such relief become moot. See Sample v. Borg, 870 F.2d 563 23 (9th Cir. 1989); Darring v. Kincheloe, 783 F.2d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1986). See also Reimers v. 24 Oregon, 863 F.2d 630, 632 (9th Cir. 1988). Plaintiff has demonstrated no reasonable possibility 25 that he will be incarcerated at the Shasta County Jail at any predictable time in the future. 26 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (Dkt. No. 11) be denied as moot. 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 4 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty- 5 one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 6 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 7 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 8 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 9 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 DATED: August 5, 2011 11 12 _____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 jay1448.pi 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
