Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01729/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01729-1/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

JESSE T. MOTEN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-1729 GEB DAD P

vs.

JAMES GOMEZ, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the court is plaintiff’s motion requesting injunctive relief.

Plaintiff claims that he has suffered retaliation at the hands of the defendants

named in his second amended complaint pending before this court. Those defendants are

employed at CSP-Solano, CSP-Centinela, and CSP-Calipatria. Court records indicate that

plaintiff is currently incarcerated at CSP-Corcoran. 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, 149 (1975); Dilley v. Gunn, 64 F.3d 1365, 1368-69 (9th Cir. 1995). Accordingly,

plaintiff’s motion should be denied as moot.

/////

Case 2:03-cv-01729-GEB-DAD Document 26 Filed 08/15/05 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 December 8,

2004 motion for injunctive relief be denied.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

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

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

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: August 14, 2005.

DAD:4

mote1729.49b

Case 2:03-cv-01729-GEB-DAD Document 26 Filed 08/15/05 Page 2 of 2