Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Thomas v. Perez

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION


February 24, 2009

EDWARD THOMAS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
T. FELKER, T. PEREZ, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Susan P. Graber United States Circuit Judge

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Plaintiff is a state prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has also filed a motion for an emergency preliminary injunction, in which he seeks an order requiring the defendants to transfer him, with all of his personal and legal property, from High Desert State Prison to the California Medical Facility (CMF) or to another California correctional facility.

"A federal court may issue an injunction if it has personal jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter jurisdiction over the claim; it may not attempt to determine the rights of persons not before the court." Zepeda v. INS, 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir. 1985). At this time, the defendants have not yet been served with the summons and the complaint. This court must review any civil complaint brought by a prisoner that seeks redress from a governmental entity or an officer or employee thereof. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). After engaging in that review, this court may dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. § 1915A(b)(1)-(2).

This court is in the process of evaluating Plaintiff's complaint to determine whether it should be dismissed, in whole or in part, on any of the grounds stated above. Plaintiff is not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief unless and until the court (1) finds that his complaint states cognizable claims for relief against at least one named defendant and (2) authorizes service of the summons and complaint on at least one named defendant. Accordingly, at this juncture, Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief is denied as premature. Plaintiff may file another motion for preliminary injunctive relief, if appropriate, after the court has ordered service on one or more defendants.*fn1

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.