Ali Kane v. Robert Jackson, Brian J. Done, and Department of Corrections
This text of Ali Kane v. Robert Jackson, Brian J. Done, and Department of Corrections (Ali Kane v. Robert Jackson, Brian J. Done, and Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 U.S. F D IL IS E T D R I I N C T T H C E O URT 2 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Mar 16, 2026 3 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK
5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6
7 ALI KANE, No: 4:25-CV-05104-RLP 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR 9 v. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR DEFAULT 10 ROBERT JACKSON, BRIAN J. JUDGMENT; DENYING MOTION DONE, and DEPARTMENT OF FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT; AND 11 CORRECTIONS, GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW MOTION FOR 12 Defendants. DEFAULT JUDGMENT
14 Before the Court are Plaintiff Ali Kane’s Motion to Enforce the Due Process 15 Clause and End the Inordinate Delay of Plaintiff’s Request for Preliminary 16 Injunction, ECF No. 13, Motion to Expedite Motion to Enforce the Due Process 17 Clause and End the Inordinate Delay of Plaintiff’s Request for Preliminary 18 Injunction, ECF No. 14, Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order – 19 Oral Argument Requested, ECF No. 15, Motion for Default Judgment, ECF No. 20 16, Motion for Entry of Default, ECF No. 17, and Motion/Request to Withdraw 21 Motion for Default Judgment, ECF No. 18. The motions were considered without 1 oral argument. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Mr. Kane’s 2 Motion/Request to Withdraw Motion for Default Judgment and denies the
3 remaining motions. 4 BACKGROUND 5 Mr. Kane, currently housed at the Monroe Correctional Complex, is
6 proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. On December 9, 2025, the Court issued 7 an Order Directing Service of Mr. Kane’s Second Amended Complaint (SAC). 8 ECF No. 11. Mr. Kane claims that on September 26, 2024, while housed at the 9 Washington State Penitentiary (WSP), Defendant Brian Done, a Correctional
10 Officer at WSP, confiscated his Holy Quran and threw it in the trash. ECF No. 12 11 at 6. Mr. Kane also names Robert Jackson, the Superintendent of WSP, and the 12 Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC), as Defendants to this action.
13 Mr. Kane seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief, claiming his First 14 Amendment right to freely exercise his religion has been violated. ECF No. 12 at 15 4, 22–23. He also claims Defendants have violated the Religious Land Use and 16 Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). Id.
17 ANALYSIS 18 1. Injunctive Relief Motions 19 In his Motion to Enforce the Due Process Clause and End the Inordinate
20 Delay of Plaintiff’s Request for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 13, Mr. Kane 21 1 ordering the Washington State DOC to allow him access to an Arabic Quran, but 2 the Court has not addressed this issue. Mr. Kane sought to have an Arabic Quran
3 prior to Ramadan, stating this will be the second consecutive Ramadan without 4 access to an Arabic Quran. Id. at 2. He contends the Washington State DOC is 5 denying an essential part of his religion by continuing to deny him access to an
6 Arabic Quran. Id. at 1. Mr. Kane asserts it is in the public interest to ensure a 7 party’s constitutional rights are protected. Id. He claims he has already suffered 8 irreparable harm “for well over a year” by being denied access to an Arabic Quran. 9 Id. at 2. He requests the Court order the Washington State DOC to replace his
10 Arabic Quran “as soon as possible to prevent further harm.” Id. 11 In his Motion to Expedite Motion to Enforce the Due Process Clause and 12 End the Inordinate Delay of Plaintiff’s Request for Preliminary Injunction, ECF
13 No. 14, Mr. Kane asks the Court to expedite the motion hearing due to time 14 sensitive religious matters such as upcoming Ramadan. He asserts that having an 15 Arabic Quran is vital to the practice of Al-Islam. Id. at 1. 16 In his Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, ECF No. 15,
17 Mr. Kane requests the Court issue an emergency restraining order against 18 Defendants, requiring them to return or replace his Arabic Quran. He alleges it has 19 been over a year since his Quran was confiscated and his religion has been
20 severely disrupted. Id. at 1. He contends it is essential and mandatory he have 21 access to an Arabic Quran before Ramadan. Id. 1 In his SAC and the instant Motions, Mr. Kane requests the Court issue an 2 order for a preliminary injunction, requiring the Washington State DOC to replace
3 his Arabic Quran. ECF No. 10 at 23. “A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary 4 remedy never awarded as of right.” Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 5 7, 24 (2008). “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is
6 likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the 7 absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that 8 an injunction is in the public interest.” Id. at 20. 9 Mr. Kane also requests the Court issue an emergency restraining order
10 against Defendants, requiring them to return or replace his Arabic Quran. ECF No. 11 15. “[T]he legal standards applicable to TROs and preliminary injunctions are 12 ‘substantially identical.’” Washington v. Trump, 847 F.3d 1151, 1159 n.3 (9th Cir.
13 2017) (quoting Stuhlbarg Int’l Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co., 240 F.3d 832, 14 839 n.7 (9th Cir. 2001)). 15 In his SAC, Plaintiff states he wrote multiple kites to staff at the WSP and 16 Coyote Ridge Corrections Center, requesting a replacement Arabic-English
17 language Quran. ECF No. 10 at 9–11, 13–16, 22–23. However, Plaintiff is now 18 housed at Monroe Correctional Complex and, although he asserts he still does not 19 have an Arabic-English Quran, his SAC and his Motions are silent as to whether he
20 has tried to obtain a Quran from the chaplain or other staff at this institution. 21 Therefore, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s requests for preliminary and emergency 1 injunctive relief at this time. Mr. Kane’s request for oral argument on his 2 Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, ECF No. 15, is also denied.
3 2. Motions Related to Default 4 In his Motion for Default Judgment, ECF No. 16, Mr. Kane seeks a default 5 judgment in his favor. He argues Defendants had sixty days from December 9,
6 2026 to respond to his SAC but he has not received any response. Id. Mr. Kane 7 also asks the Court to strike Defendants’ response if it is filed after the deadline. Id. 8 In Mr. Kane’s Motion/Request to Withdraw Motion for Default Judgment, 9 ECF No. 18, he acknowledges he did not follow the proper steps before he filed a
10 motion for default judgment. He asks the Court to withdraw his Motion for Default 11 Judgment. Id. at 1. The Court grants Mr. Kane’s Motion to Withdraw Motion for 12 Default Judgment, ECF No. 18, and denies as moot his Motion for Default
13 Judgment, ECF No. 16. 14 In his Motion for Entry of Default, ECF No. 17, Mr. Kane requests a clerk’s 15 order of default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55. He claims 16 Defendants were served with the SAC via the Washington State Attorney
17 General’s Office on December 9, 2025. Id. at 1. He argues Defendants had sixty 18 days after service to respond to the SAC, but he has not received any response. Id. 19 Due to an oversight, the Washington State Attorney General’s Office did not
20 receive the service email in this case until March 9, 2026. Therefore, Mr. Kane’s 21 1 CONCLUSION 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
3 1.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ali Kane v. Robert Jackson, Brian J. Done, and Department of Corrections, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ali-kane-v-robert-jackson-brian-j-done-and-department-of-corrections-waed-2026.