IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 21, 2011
PHILLIP CARY PAPPAS, PLAINTIFF,
BLACKWELL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and informa pauperis with an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has filed a motion requesting that he be released from "the hole," or the administrative segregation unit at California State Prison-Solano (CSP-Solano). He alleges his placement in administrative segregation was in retaliation for filing the instant lawsuit. He also seeks injunctive relief in the form of an order requiring the warden at CSP-Solano to show that his placement in administrative segregation is not related to the instant lawsuit. The warden is not a party to this lawsuit.
Two months after filing the motion, plaintiff filed a notice of change of address to reflect his transfer to Avenal State Prison. Generally, when a prisoner complains of unconstitutional conditions of confinement and is transferred to another facility, a claim for injunctive relief from those conditions becomes moot. See Brady v. Smith, 656 F.2d 466, 468 (9th Cir. 1981); Darring v. Kinchoe, 783 F.2d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1986); Johnson v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 519 (9th Cir. 1990). A plaintiff may avoid a finding of mootness if he can demonstrate a reasonable expectation of returning to the facility where the allegedly unconstitutional conditions persist. Darring, 783 F.2d at 876. Plaintiff has made no such showing here.*fn1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for release form "the hole" (Docket No. 13) is moot.