Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06149/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06149-2/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

DENNIS McCORNELL,

Plaintiff, CV F 02 6149 AWI WMW P

 vs.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

RE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY

INJUNCTION (DOC 43)

JAMES GOMEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Pending before the court is

Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

Plaintiff’s motion consists of a two page recitation of the allegations of the

complaint. Plaintiff does not seek any specific relief, or identify any action that he would like

the court to take.

The legal principles applicable to a request for preliminary injunctive relief are

well established. To prevail, the moving party must show either "(1) a likelihood of success on

the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury, or (2) the existence of serious questions going

to the merits and the balance of hardships tipping in [the moving party's] favor." Oakland

Tribune, Inc. v. Chronicle Publishing Company, Inc., 762 F.2d 1374, 1376 (9th Cir. 1985),

Case 1:02-cv-06149-AWI-WMW Document 46 Filed 02/21/06 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

quoting Apple Computer, Inc. v. Formula International, Inc., 725 F.2d 521, 523 (9th Cir. 1984);

see also Hartikka v. United States, 754 F.2d 1516, 1518 (9th Cir. 1985). The two formulations

represent two points on a sliding scale with the focal point being the degree of irreparable injury

shown. Oakland Tribune, 762 F.2d at 1376. "Under either formulation of the test, plaintiff must

demonstrate that there exists a significant threat of irreparable injury." Id. In the absence of a

significant showing of irreparability, the court need not reach the issue of likelihood of success

on the merits. Id.

Subsequent to the motion, the court entered an order dismissing the complaint,

granting plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has yet to file an amended

complaint. Absent an operative pleading, plaintiff has not met the above standard.

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

injunctive relief be denied.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B). Within

ten days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 21, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

mmkd34 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-06149-AWI-WMW Document 46 Filed 02/21/06 Page 2 of 2