Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00988/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00988-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1391 Personal Injury

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD E. WILMSHURST, 

Plaintiff,

v.

BILL LOCKYER, Attorney General,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA; SUPERIOR

COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

CALAVERAS

Defendants. 

CIV-S-04-0988 DFL-KJM

ORDER

On July 12, 2005, plaintiff Richard Wilmshurst, proceeding

pro se, filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”)

against defendant Bill Lockyer, the attorney general of

California, in which he seeks to prohibit Lockyer and his agents

from coming within 150 feet of him. Plaintiff alleges that he

was wrongfully assaulted and arrested by agents of the California

Attorney General’s Office while attending a speech given by

Lockyer on June 29, 2005. (Mot. at 3-4.) The TRO is necessary,

plaintiff contends, to protect him from future harm and to

protect the jurisdiction of the court over this case. (Id. at 4-

Case 2:04-cv-00988-DFL -KJM Document 77 Filed 07/13/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

5.) 

The court finds plaintiff’s arguments insufficient to

justify the issuance of a TRO because he fails to articulate a

substantial likelihood of imminent, irreparable harm. Plaintiff

seeks a TRO request preventing Lockyer or his agents from coming

within 150 feet of him, yet plaintiff’s submitted evidence shows

that it was he who sought out Lockyer, not the other way around. 

Even accepting plaintiff’s allegations as true, his evidence does

not show that he faces a real and imminent threat of future harm. 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s TRO request is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 7/13/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00988-DFL -KJM Document 77 Filed 07/13/05 Page 2 of 2