Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05932/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05932-8/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

MICHAEL PADDOCK,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-CV-5932-OWW-SMS-P

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO EITHER

WITHDRAW HIS MOTION AS MOOT OR

NOTIFY COURT WHY MOTION HAS NOT

BEEN RENDERED MOOT BY

MODIFICATION TO GROOMING

REGULATIONS

(Doc. 50) 

Plaintiff Michael Paddock (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1 (Religious Land Use and

Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000). On December 19, 2005, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a

preliminary injunction prohibiting Defendants Mendoza-Powers and Woodford from enforcing the

grooming regulations against him. 

Plaintiff contends that he is a Navajo Native American and holds a “sincere religious belief

that he may cut his hair only upon the death of a loved one.” (Motion, p.2.) Plaintiff seeks an order

prohibiting enforcement of the grooming regulation requiring male inmates’ hair to be no longer than

three inches against him. The grooming regulation at issue has recently been modified to permit

inmates to wear their hair any length as long as it does “not extend over the eyebrows, cover the

inmate’s face or pose a health or safety risk.” Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15 § 3062(e) (2006). It appears

that this modification has rendered Plaintiff’s pending motion moot.

Case 1:04-cv-05932-OWW -SMS Document 51 Filed 02/17/06 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

27

28

2

In light of the recent modification to the grooming regulations, it is HEREBY ORDERED

that within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall either (1) notify the

Court that his pending motion is moot, or (2) file a supplement to his motion setting forth the reason

for his belief that his motion is not moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 15, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05932-OWW -SMS Document 51 Filed 02/17/06 Page 2 of 2