(PC) Washington v. Sexton

E.D. California

(PC) Washington v. Sexton

District Court, E.D. California·Decided September 24, 2019·No. 1:18-cv-00513·Unknown

Opinion

JAMIEN WASHINGTON, Case No. 1:18-cv-0513-DAD-JLT (PC)

Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR v. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

M. SEXTON, et al., (Doc. 20) Defendants. FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE Plaintiff has filed a motion for injunctive relief concerning the conduct of non-party Correctional Officer Alford, whom plaintiff accuses of harassing him for having filed this lawsuit against a friend. (Doc. 20.) Citing security concerns, plaintiff seeks an order transferring him to another yard within the same institution or transferring him to another institution entirely. As noted, plaintiff’s motion is premised on the conduct of an individual not named in this action. Insofar as plaintiff seeks an order directing Officer Alford to stop harassing plaintiff, this Court is unable to issue an order against individuals who are not parties to a suit pending before it. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 112 (1969). Additionally, the relief that plaintiff seeks is unrelated to the claims in this case, which are premised on an assault that occurred on March 22, 2017. The Court cannot issue an order addressing claims not before it. Price v. City of Stockton, 390 F.3d 1105, 1117 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief be These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 24, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JAMIEN WASHINGTON, Case No. 1:18-cv-0513-DAD-JLT (PC)

Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR v. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

M. SEXTON, et al., (Doc. 20) Defendants. FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE Plaintiff has filed a motion for injunctive relief concerning the conduct of non-party Correctional Officer Alford, whom plaintiff accuses of harassing him for having filed this lawsuit against a friend. (Doc. 20.) Citing security concerns, plaintiff seeks an order transferring him to another yard within the same institution or transferring him to another institution entirely. As noted, plaintiff’s motion is premised on the conduct of an individual not named in this action. Insofar as plaintiff seeks an order directing Officer Alford to stop harassing plaintiff, this Court is unable to issue an order against individuals who are not parties to a suit pending before it. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 112 (1969). Additionally, the relief that plaintiff seeks is unrelated to the claims in this case, which are premised on an assault that occurred on March 22, 2017. The Court cannot issue an order addressing claims not before it. Price v. City of Stockton, 390 F.3d 1105, 1117 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief be These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 24, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

(PC) Washington v. Sexton, (E.D. Cal. 2019).

Pincite

(PC) Washington v. Sexton ((PC) Washington v. Sexton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related