Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00482/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00482-6/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

BERLAN LYNELL DICEY, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0482 GEB KJM P

vs.

S. PICKENS, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prison inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under

42 U.S.C. § 1983. He challenges defendants Pickens, Hassell, Tutor and Harrison’s refusal to

honor a doctor’s orders to give him a lower bunk.

On October 23, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order

and a preliminary injunction, seeking an order directing Legal Technical Assistant Miller and

Librarian J. Flaherty to provide him with blank paper and envelopes so that plaintiff, an indigent

prisoner, may litigate this action and Dicey v. Weaver, Civ. No. S-05-1171 FCD KJM P.

Plaintiff seeks 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). 

Case 2:06-cv-00482-CKD Document 22 Filed 12/04/06 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

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s October 23, 2006 request for a

temporary restraining order is denied.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s October 23, 2006 motion for a

preliminary injunction be denied. 

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, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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: December 1, 2006. 

2

dice0482.tro

Case 2:06-cv-00482-CKD Document 22 Filed 12/04/06 Page 2 of 2