Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01582/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01582-6/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

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

ALEJANDRO JOSE MORALES, 

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

H. SHERWOOD, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:13-cv-01582-AWI-GSA-PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE 

RELIEF AS MOOT

(Doc. 23.)

I. BACKGROUND

Alejandro Jose Morales (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint 

commencing this action on October 1, 2013. (Doc. 1.) 

On June 23, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for a court order enjoining defendants 

Hezekiah Sherwood, Greg Coontz, and Leah Gilera from “punching, hitting, pepper spraying in 

mouth, pull hair for no reason, write false 115’s causing more time in prison, retaliating, 

threatening, taking legal papers from cell, or caus[ing] injury or even death . . . or taking legal 

documents regarding suit/mail sent or received.” (Doc. 23 at 1.) 

II. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

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

preliminary injunctive relief, the Court is bound by the requirement that as a preliminary 

Case 1:13-cv-01582-DAD-EPG Document 25 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 2
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

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. 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 

Arelief [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.@

The defendants whose conduct Plaintiff seeks to enjoin by his present motion are 

employees at California Correctional Institution (CCI) in Tehachapi, California. Because 

Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at CCI and therefore is not subject to conduct by those 

officials,1Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief must be denied as moot. 

III. CONCLUSION

 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for 

preliminary injunctive relief, filed on January 23, 2014, is DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2014 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

1On January 8, 2014, Plaintiff filed a notice of change of his address to Ironwood State Prison in Blythe, 

California. (Doc. 10.)

Case 1:13-cv-01582-DAD-EPG Document 25 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 2