Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01512/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01512-3/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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN E. MITCHELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. BEARD, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:15-cv-01512 DLB PC

ORDER DISREGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION FOR 

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

[ECF No. 14]

Plaintiff John E. Mitchell, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 5, 2015.

1

 

On October 8, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction. On November 4, 

2015, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction for lack of standing. On 

January 7, 2016, Plaintiff filed a supplement to his motion for preliminary injunction. In his 

pleading, Plaintiff states this to be his second supplement to his original motion. Plaintiff is 

advised that his motion for preliminary injunction was denied on November 4, 2015, as noted 

above. Therefore, the supplement will be disregarded. To the extent Plaintiff wishes to renew his 

motion or request the supplement be considered a second motion for preliminary injunction, his 

request is denied.

As discussed in the Court’s previous order, Plaintiff must demonstrate he has standing to 

seek preliminary injunctive relief. Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493, 129 S.Ct. 

 

1

Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge on October 16, 2015.

Case 1:15-cv-01512-DAD-GSA Document 16 Filed 01/13/16 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

1142 (2009); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2010). For the same reasons 

stated in the Court’s previous order of November 4, Plaintiff lacks standing to seek the relief 

requested in his supplement to his motion. Summers, 555 U.S. at 493; Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969. 

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s supplement to his motion for 

preliminary injunction is DISREGARDED. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to renew his motion or 

request the supplement be considered a new motion for preliminary injunction, his request is 

DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2016 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01512-DAD-GSA Document 16 Filed 01/13/16 Page 2 of 2