Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01284/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01284-3/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

JAMISI JERMAINE CALLOWAY,

Plaintiff, CV F 05 1284 AWI WMW P

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

RE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY

INJUNCTION (DOCUMENT 4)

WARDEN, CSP CORCORAN, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Pending before the court is Plaintiff’s

motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiff seeks an injunction against several individuals

employed by the Department of Corrections at CSP Corcoran for unspecified conduct. The

conduct that gives rise to this lawsuit occurred while Plaintiff was housed at CSP Corcoran. 

Subsequent to the filing of Plaintiff’s motion, Plaintiff was transferred to Vacaville.

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 (1975); Enrico's, Inc. v. Rice, 730 F.2d

1250, 1255 (9th Cir. 1984).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s motion for a

 preliminary injunction be denied.

Case 1:05-cv-01284-BAM Document 17 Filed 07/18/06 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

2

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B). Within thirty

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

objections with the court. Such a 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 18, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

mmkd34 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01284-BAM Document 17 Filed 07/18/06 Page 2 of 2