Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00026/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00026-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESUS B. CASTANEDA,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. FOSTON, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:12-cv–00026-AWI-BAM PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

(ECF No. 7)

Plaintiff Jesus B. Castaneda is a state prisoner proceeding with appointed counsel and in

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 30, 2012,

Plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 7.) 

On May 29, 2012, counsel was appointed in this action, and the complaint was dismissed, with leave

to amend within sixty days. (ECF Nos. 15, 16.) On July 26, 2012, Plaintiff was granted a sixty day

extension of time to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 23.)

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and in considering a request for injunctive

relief, the Court is bound by the requirement that as a preliminary matter, it have before it an actual

case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983);

Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464,

471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 757-58 (1982). If the Court does not have an actual case or controversy before

it, it has no power to hear the matter in question. Id. “[The] triad of injury in fact, causation, and

redressability constitutes the core of Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement, and the party

invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing its existence.” Steel Co. v. Citizens

1

Case 1:12-cv-00026-AWI-BAM Document 24 Filed 09/17/12 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

27

28

for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83, 103-04, 118 S.Ct. 1003 (1998). Requests for prospective relief are

further limited by 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which requires

that the Court find the “relief [sought] is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to

correct the violation of the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the

violation of the Federal right.”

Since Plaintiff’s complaint has been dismissed there is no case or controversy before the

Court upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining

order and preliminary injunction, filed January 30, 2012, is HEREBY DENIED, without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 14, 2012 

0m8i78 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

2

Case 1:12-cv-00026-AWI-BAM Document 24 Filed 09/17/12 Page 2 of 2