Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01673/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01673-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

WO KM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

John R. Bacon, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-1673-PHX-GMS (LOA)

ORDER

Plaintiff John R. Bacon, who is confined in the Maricopa County Fourth Avenue

Jail, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an Application

to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. On October 17, 2008, the Court granted Plaintiff in forma

pauperis status and dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend.

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s October 16, 2008 “Motion for Medical

Treatment” (Doc. #8), in which Plaintiff asks that the Court order Defendants to provide

Plaintiff with medical care. The Court will construe Plaintiff’s Motion as a motion for

preliminary injunction.

A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy and will not be

granted absent a clear showing of likely success in the underlying claim and possible

irreparable injury. See Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997) (per curiam);

Warsoldier v. Woodford, 418 F.3d 989, 993-94 (9th Cir. 2005); Pratt v. Rowland, 65 F.3d

802, 805 (9th Cir. 1995). Alternately, a party may show that serious questions going to

the merits were raised and the balance of hardships tips sharply in his favor. Warsoldier,

Case 2:08-cv-01673-GMS Document 9 Filed 10/24/08 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 -

418 F.3d at 994.

A party seeking preliminary injunctive relief “must necessarily establish a

relationship between the injury claimed in the party’s motion and the conduct asserted in

the complaint.” Devose v. Herrington, 42 F.3d 470, 471 (8th Cir. 1994) (per curiam)

(Eighth Amendment claim cannot provide basis for preliminary injunction against alleged

acts in retaliation for filing claim). In other words, Plaintiff must seek injunctive relief

related to the merits of his underlying claim. Because there presently is no complaint

pending, Plaintiff’s request is not properly before the Court at this time. Accordingly, the

Court will deny, without prejudice, Plaintiff’s Motion for Medical Treatment.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s October 17, 2008 Motion for Medical Treatment

(Doc. #8) is denied without prejudice.

DATED this 23rd day of October, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-01673-GMS Document 9 Filed 10/24/08 Page 2 of 2