THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 9, 2009
JONATHAN WESLEY GRIGSBY, PLAINTIFF,
SUSAN HUBERT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Michael Seabright United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER OF SERVICE AND TRANSFER [TO] VACAVILLE OR SAT 4 FOLSOM
On January 8, 2009, Plaintiff Jonathan Wesley Grigsby ("Plaintiff") filed a "Motion for Order of Service and Transfer [to] Vacaville or Sat 4 Folsom" ("Plaintiff's Motion"). While not entirely clear, Plaintiff appears to ask the court to order (1) service of his Amended Complaint and/or TRO, and (2) Plaintiff's transfer to a different prison facility with better access to legal materials. The court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for the following reasons.
First, Plaintiff's Amended Complaint has not yet been screened by the court and therefore, it will not be served unless and until the court determines that it states a claim. This action was only recently reassigned to the undersigned, and the court will screen Plaintiff's Amended Complaint in due course.
Second, to the extent Plaintiff seeks to have a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order served, the only such motion received by the court was denied on May 8, 2008.
Finally, it is well established that Plaintiff has no right to incarceration in the prison of his choice. See Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 245 (1983); Montayne v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236, 242-43 (1976); Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 225 (1976); Pratt v. Rowland, 65 F.3d 802, 806 (1995).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.