UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 27, 2012
PAIN MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE STAFF DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
EMERGENCY TEMPORARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
AT CORCORAN STATE (ECF No. 15) PRISON,
Plaintiff Roberto Herrera is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed November 8, 2012 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (Consent to Magistrate, ECF No. 5.)
The Court screened Plaintiff's Complaint and dismissed it on November 30, 2012 for failure to state a claim, but gave Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. (Order Dismiss. Compl., ECF No. 8.)
Plaintiff previously filed two essentially duplicative motions for emergency injunctive relief, one on November 8, 2012 and one on November 26, 2012 (Mots. Inj. Relief, ECF Nos. 2, 6). The Court denied both by order issued December 21, 2012. (Order Den. Inj. Relief, ECF No. 17.)
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for emergency temporary injunctive relief filed December 20, 2012. (Mot. Inj. Relief, ECF No. 15.) The instant motion is essentially duplicative of those motions denied by the Court in its December 21, 2012 order. It too shall be denied by the Court on the same grounds.
For the reasons stated in the Court's December 21, 2012 order, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to identify facts sufficient to show he is in need of and entitled to injunctive relief.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion seeking emergency temporary injunctive relief (ECF No. 15) is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff is advised that continued filing of duplicative motions may be met with sanctions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.