Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00172/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00172-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD VICTOR SEVILLA,

Plaintiff, CV F 06 0172 OWW WMW P

vs. FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION RE 

 MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

 (DOCS 4, 19)

DARREL ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

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

Plaintiff’s motion for a change of venue. 

Plaintiff, an inmate in the custody of the California Department of Corrections at

Pleasant Valley State Prison, brings this civil rights action against defendant correctional officials

employed by the Department of Corrections at the California Substance Abuse Treatment

Facility at Corcoran. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief against the named defendants in this action.

 When an inmate seeks injunctive or declaratory relief concerning the prison where

he is incarcerated, his claims for such relief become moot when he is no longer subjected to those

conditions. See Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975); Enrico's, Inc. v. Rice, 730 F.2d

1250, 1255 (9th Cir. 1984). Accordingly, plaintiff's request[s] should be denied as moot.

Case 1:06-cv-00172-LJO -SKO Document 31 Filed 01/19/07 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s motions for

injunctive relief be denied as moot.

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

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

written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

objections within the specified time waives all objections to the judge’s findings of fact. See

Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9 Cir. 1998). Failure to file objections within the th

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: January 18, 2007 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

j14hj0 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00172-LJO -SKO Document 31 Filed 01/19/07 Page 2 of 2