Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00086/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00086-32/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRYAN E. RANSOM,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. JOHNSON, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-00086-OWW-GSA PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S SECOND

MOTION FOR AN EMERGENCY

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION/TRO 

(Doc. 98)

Plaintiff Bryan E. Ransom (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 10, 2007, Plaintiff

filed a second motion seeking an “emergency” preliminary injunction/temporary restraining order.

Plaintiff seeks an order mandating that prison officials retain him in the Security Housing Unit

pending resolution of this action, and submit his case factors to the sentencing court.

The purpose of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo if the balance of equities

so heavily favors the moving party that justice requires the Court to intervene to secure the positions

until the merits of the action are ultimately determined. University of Texas v. Camenisch, 451 U.S.

390, 395 (1981). Plaintiff was previously informed by this Court that because the claims in this

action arise from the past conduct of Defendants, the pendency of this action does not confer upon

the Court a jurisdictional basis upon which to issue any orders directing at remedying Plaintiff’s

current conditions of confinement. (Docs. 79, 111.) Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary

injunctive relief, filed December 10, 2007, is HEREBY DENIED. 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A); City

///

Case 1:05-cv-00086-OWW -GSA Document 129 Filed 04/15/08 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

27

28

2

of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 101, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Jones v. City of Los

Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir. 2006). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 14, 2008 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00086-OWW -GSA Document 129 Filed 04/15/08 Page 2 of 2