Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01986/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01986-3/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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California

Armand Florez,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 01-1986 LKK PAN P

vs. Findings and Recommendations

California Department

of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants.

o0o

Plaintiff seeks damages and injunctive relief upon the

ground defendant Clendenin retaliated against plaintiff and used

excessive force. Defendant has answered the complaint. 

Plaintiff moves for a temporary restraining order and a

preliminary injunction barring retaliation in the form of

excessive force and repeated verbal harassment by officers J.

Feltner, J. Lowe, J. Etheredge, T. Gottfried, Stacy and Hudgings,

none of whom are party to this action. Plaintiff requests an

order prohibiting these officers from having contact with each

Case 2:01-cv-01986-LKK -PAN Document 121 Filed 06/08/05 Page 1 of 3
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

other while working and from carrying restraining devices. 

A temporary restraining order will issue to an applicant for

a preliminary injunction to prevent irreparable injury before the

court can hear the application for a preliminary injunction. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b); Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood

of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers Local No. 70 of Alameda County,

415 U.S. 423, 439 (1974). 

A preliminary injunction will not issue unless necessary

because threatened injury would impair the court’s ability to

grant effective relief in a pending action. Sierra On-Line, Inc.

v. Phoenix Software, Inc., 739 F.2d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1984);

Gon v. First State Ins. Co., 871 F.2d 863 (9th Cir. 1989). To

prevail, plaintiff must demonstrate either probable success on

the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury, or serious

questions regarding the merits and a balance of hardships tipping

sharply in his favor. Miss Universe, Inc. v. Flesher, 605 F.2d

1130, 1134 (9th Cir. 1979). If the balance of harm tips

decidedly toward the plaintiff, then the plaintiff need not show

as robust a likelihood of success on the merits as when the

balance tips less decidedly. Benda v. Grand Lodge of the

International Association of Machinists, 584 F.2d 308, 315 (9th

Cir. 1978). 

The court finds the relief plaintiff seeks is not necessary

to abate the risk of harm alleged.

 For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s September 13, 2004,

request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary

Case 2:01-cv-01986-LKK -PAN Document 121 Filed 06/08/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

injunction should be denied.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l) these findings and

recommendations are submitted to the district judge assigned to

this case. Within 20 days after being served with these findings

and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections. The

document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” The district judge may accept,

reject, or modify these findings and recommendations in whole or

in part.

Dated: June 7, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:01-cv-01986-LKK -PAN Document 121 Filed 06/08/05 Page 3 of 3