Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00936/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00936-6/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEE ANDREW REED, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0936 LKK GGH P

vs.

S. HAVERKAMP, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 19, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. In this

motion, plaintiff also alleges that he is in great pain and requests that he be transferred to a

medical facility.

Plaintiff is presently housed at Kern Valley State Prison (KVSP). No defendants

are located at KVSP. Plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief against individuals who are not named

as defendants in this action. 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). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s request for

injunctive relief contained in his July 19, 2006, motion for appointment of counsel be denied.

Case 2:04-cv-00936-LKK -GGH Document 49 Filed 07/26/06 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

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 twenty

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 reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten 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). 

DATED: 7/26/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

re936.inj

Case 2:04-cv-00936-LKK -GGH Document 49 Filed 07/26/06 Page 2 of 2