Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00004/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00004-6/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARDELL COWART,

Plaintiff,

v.

RAHMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:16-cv-00004-AWI-SKO (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF=S MOTION 

FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

BE DENIED and ORDER REQUESTING 

ASSISTANCE OF LITIGATION 

COORDINATOR

(Doc. 20)

TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff, Gardell Cowart, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. On November 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed a 

request for emergency injunctive relief to obtain various forms of medical care. (Doc. 20). 

Plaintiff’s request mirrors his motion from August of this year (Doc. 16), which was denied on 

October 14, 2016, (Docs. 17, 19). 

As stated in the findings and recommendations on Plaintiff’s prior request for injunctive 

relief, A[a] plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on 

the merits and to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of 

equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.@ Winter v. Natural 

Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008) (citations omitted). AA preliminary 

injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as a matter of right. In each case, courts 

must balance the competing claims of injury and must consider the effect on each party of the 

granting or withholding of the requested relief. In exercising their sound discretion, courts of 

equity should pay particular regard for the public consequences in employing the extraordinary 

remedy of injunction.@ Id., at 24 (citations and quotations omitted). An injunction may only be 

awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such relief. Id., at 22. 

Case 1:16-cv-00004-AWI-SKO Document 21 Filed 11/22/16 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

27

28

2

Requests for prospective relief are further limited by 18 U.S.C. ' 3626 (a)(1)(A) of the 

Prison Litigation Reform Act, which requires that the Court find the Arelief [sought] is narrowly 

drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal Right, and is the 

least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of the Federal Right.@ 

AAn inmate seeking an injunction on the ground that there is a contemporary violation of a 

nature likely to continue, must adequately plead such a violation; . . . .@ Farmer v. Brennan, 511 

U.S. 825, 845-46 (1994) (citations and quotations omitted). Following screening, such as when 

defending a motion for summary judgment, a plaintiff Amust come forward with evidence from 

which it can be inferred that the defendant-officials were at the time suit was filed, and are at the 

time of summary judgment, knowingly and unreasonably disregarding an objectively intolerable 

risk of harm, and that they will continue to do so; and finally to establish eligibility for an 

injunction, the inmate must demonstrate the continuance of that disregard during the remainder of 

the litigation and into the future.@ Id., at 845-46. However, at the pleading stage, the Court is not 

in a position to determine questions regarding the merits of a claim which require submission of 

evidence as opposed to a determination whether a claim has been stated. Barrett v. Belleque, 544 

F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2008). 

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is in line for screening. It has not yet been 

ascertained whether Plaintiff has stated any cognizable claims -- let alone whether he is entitled to 

the requested relief. Even after screening, assuming Plaintiff states at least one cognizable claim, 

his request for a temporary restraining order/injunctive relief cannot be adequately addressed until 

evidence is submitted. His request must, therefore, be denied without prejudice at this time. As 

with Plaintiff’s prior motion for injunctive relief, the Litigation Office is requested to look into 

the matter and facilitate Plaintiff=s access to the medical care that has been ordered for him by his 

treating physicians and any specialists.1 

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff=s motion for injunctive 

relief, filed on November 2, 2016, be denied for lack of jurisdiction. The Clerk's Office is 

 

1 How access is best facilitated in light of Plaintiff=s housing status and other custody or classification factors is 

left to the sound discretion of prison officials.

Case 1:16-cv-00004-AWI-SKO Document 21 Filed 11/22/16 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

27

28

3

directed to forward a copy of this order and Plaintiff's motion to the Litigation Coordinator at 

California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility in Corcoran, California so they may facilitate 

Plaintiff’s access to medical care that has been ordered for him. 

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 30 

days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. Local Rule 304(b). The document should be captioned “Objections to 

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the 

specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 

839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 21, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00004-AWI-SKO Document 21 Filed 11/22/16 Page 3 of 3