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.

Walker v. Whitten

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


December 3, 2009

JEFFREY WALKER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
A.H. WHITTEN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a state prison inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that defendant Whitten retaliated against plaintiff by filing a rules violation report on April 27, 2007, placed plaintiff in a holding cage despite his awareness of the impact of such actions on plaintiff's mental health, and conducted searches for purposes of harassment; defendants Moore and Privinsky searched plaintiff for purposes of harassment; and defendant Brewer was aware that Moore and Privinsky lied about the reasons for the search yet failed to stop the search.

Plaintiff has filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and for an order directing CDCR to send his legal materials from CMF to CMC, where he is now housed. He alleges that "prison staff" trashed and confiscated his legal material and supplies and that his remaining legal materials were not transferred with him, all in retaliation for his litigation efforts. He names C/O Smith, "etc." as those responsible for "trashed legal work." Docket No. 14 at 2.

Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief against individuals who are not named as defendants in this action. This court is unable to issue an order against individuals who are not parties to a suit pending before it. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 112 (1969).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's request for a temporary restraining order (docket no. 14) is denied.

To the extent that the request may be deemed a request for preliminary injunctive relief,

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the request for injunctive relief (docket no. 14) be denied.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

20091203

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



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.