Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Synrico Rodgers v. R. Lopez

July 19, 2012

SYNRICO RODGERS,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
R. LOPEZ, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge

FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION (ECF NO. 25)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (ECF NO. 29) NOTICE AND WARNING OF REQUIREMENTS FOR OPPOSING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff Synrico Rodgers is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (Consent, ECF No. 5, 10.)

On Jun 15, 2012, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) on grounds of failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 24.)

On June 27, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking (I) weekly physical access to the Corcoran State Prison ("CSP") law library to work on this lawsuit and (ii) reassignment of Defendant Blattel out of Plaintiff's housing facility at CSP. (Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, ECF NO. 25.)

On July 13, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to reply to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (Motion for Extension of Time, ECF No. 29.)

The Motions for Miscellaneous Relief and Extension of Time are now before the Court.

II. ANALYSIS

A. Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

The Court construes this Motion as one for injunctive relief.

Injunctive relief, whether temporary or permanent, is an "extraordinary remedy, never awarded as of right." Winter v. Natural Res. Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 22 (2008). "A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest." Am. Trucking Ass'ns, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Winter, 555 U.S. at 20).

"[A] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy, one that should not be granted unless the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of persuasion." Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997). A party seeking a preliminary injunction simply cannot prevail when that motion is unsupported by evidence. "Because of the intractable problems of prison administration, a request for injunctive relief in the prison context must be viewed with considerable caution." Abraham v. Danberg, 322 Fed. Appx. 169, 170 (3d Cir. 2009) (citing Goff v. Harper, 60 F.3d 518, 520 (8th Cir. 1995).

With respect to motions for preliminary injunctive relief or a temporary restraining order, the Prison Litigation ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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