Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01114/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01114-1/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFREY E. WALKER,

Plaintiff,

v.

WECHSLER, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:16-cv-01114-SKO (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER OR 

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR LACK OF 

JURISDICTION

(Doc. 8)

Plaintiff, Jeffrey E. Walker, is a pro se civil detainee who filed this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. On August 22, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting dismissal 

of this case without prejudice which resulted in closure of the case pursuant to Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(i) on August 29, 2016. (Docs. 6, 7.) On September 23, 2016, Plaintiff 

filed a motion for injunctive relief or temporary restraining order. (Doc. 8.) 

Since Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed this action, there is no actual case or controversy 

before the Court at this time and Court lacks the jurisdiction to issue the orders sought by 

Plaintiff. Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 129 S.Ct. 1142, 1149 (2009); Stormans, Inc. v. 

Selecky, 586 F.3d 1109, 1119 (9th Cir. 2009); 18 U.S.C. ' 3626(a)(1)(A). If the Court does not 

have an actual case or controversy before it, it has no power to hear the matter in question. City 

of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Valley Forge Christian 

Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471 (1982). Further, 

A[a] federal court may issue an injunction [only] if it has personal jurisdiction over the parties and 

Case 1:16-cv-01114-SKO Document 9 Filed 10/03/16 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

subject matter jurisdiction over the claim; it may not attempt to determine the rights of persons 

not before the court.@ Zepeda v. United States Immigration Service, 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir. 

1985).

Plaintiff is not precluded from attempting to state cognizable claims in a new action if he 

believes his civil rights are being violated. The issue is not that Plaintiff=s allegations are not 

serious, or that Plaintiff is not entitled to relief if sought in the proper forum. The seriousness of 

Plaintiff=s assertions concerning the conditions under which he is being housed which cause him 

to experience post traumatic stress disorder anxiety and exacerbate his mental health condition 

cannot and do not overcome what is a jurisdictional bar. Steel Co., 523 U.S. at 103-04 (A[The] 

triad of injury in fact, causation, and redressability constitutes the core of Article III=s case-orcontroversy requirement, and the party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of 

establishing its existence.@) This action is simply not the proper vehicle for the relief Plaintiff 

seeks. However, a copy of this order and Plaintiff’s motion will be served on the Executive 

Director of Coalinga State Hospital to assist with addressing Plaintiff’s concerns.

1

 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff=s motion for injunctive relief, filed

on September 23, 2016, is DENIED for lack of jurisdiction, and the Clerk's Office is directed to 

forward a copy of this order and Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 8) to the Executive Director at Coalinga 

State Hospital to assist with addressing Plaintiff’s concerns. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 3, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

1 The manner of addressing Plaintiff’s concerns is left to the sound discretion of prison officials in light of his 

housing status and other custody or classification factors.

Case 1:16-cv-01114-SKO Document 9 Filed 10/03/16 Page 2 of 2