UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 24, 2012
CHRISTOPHER N. WASHINGTON,
DERRAL G. ADAMS,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING PRISON OFFICIALS TO RETURN LEGAL PROPERTY (Doc. 62)
Plaintiff Christopher N. Washington, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 21, 2009. On January 18, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking an order directing prison officials at California State Prison-Corcoran (Corcoran) to return his legal property.
The pendency of this action does not confer upon the Court jurisdiction over prison officials at Corcoran regarding Plaintiff's current conditions of confinement, Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493, 129 S.Ct. 1142, 1149 (2009); Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 559-61, 112 S.Ct. 2130 (1992); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2010), and given that Plaintiff only recently transferred to Corcoran, there exist no unusual or pressing circumstances warranting a courtesy inquiry, see e.g., Overton v. Bazzetta, 539 U.S. 126, 132, 123 S.Ct. 2162 ( 2003) (prison officials entitled to substantial deference); Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 482-83, 115 S.Ct. 2293 (1995) (disapproving the involvement of federal courts in the day-today-management of prisons).
If Plaintiff is unable to meet the deadline for filing objections, which is currently set for February 21, 2012, he may, once the deadline is closer, seek another extension of time. However, at this juncture, Plaintiff has described nothing out of the ordinary, as in the Court's experience, there is usually some delay in obtaining personal and legal property following a transfer to a new institution.
For these reasons, Plaintiff's motion for an order directing the return of his legal property is HEREBY DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.