Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00352/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00352-6/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

EUGENE C. BROWN,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. CHOTHIA, et al.,

Defendants.

1:19-cv-00352-DAD-EPG (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 

RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTIVE 

RELIEF BE DENIED AS MOOT

(ECF No. 25)

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN 

TWENTY-ONE DAYS

Plaintiff, Eugene C. Brown, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 11, 2019, Plaintiff filed a 

motion for temporary injunctive relief. (ECF No. 25.)

At the time Plaintiff filed this action and his motion for temporary injunctive relief, 

Plaintiff worked in a sewing factory at the Sierra Conservation Center. Plaintiff alleges that 

Defendants have repeatedly changed the propane tank on a forklift located on the sewing factory 

floor a short distance away from and in the presence of Plaintiff and have allowed propane to 

escape from the propane tanks and lines, exposing Plaintiff and other inmates in the sewing 

factory to a serious risk of harm. In his motion for temporary injunctive relief, Plaintiff seeks an 

order prohibiting Defendants from exchanging the forklift propane tanks on the sewing factory 

floor while Plaintiff and other inmates are present (ECF No. 25).

During the scheduling conference, held on January 22, 2020, Plaintiff admitted that he is 

no longer employed at the sewing factory and thus is no longer present when propane tanks are 

Case 1:19-cv-00352-DAD-EPG Document 49 Filed 01/28/20 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

exchanged on the forklift. Further, Defendants’ counsel represented that there was a change in 

procedure and that the exchange of propane tanks is now occurring in a different location. 

Plaintiff agreed that this change in procedure occurred but noted that because he is no longer in 

the sewing factory, he does not know whether this change in procedure is continuing.

By Plaintiff’s own admission, he is no longer exposed to the risk of harm upon which his 

motion for temporary injunctive relief is based. This change in circumstances renders Plaintiff’s

motion for temporary injunctive relief moot.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s motion for temporary injunctive 

relief (ECF No. 25) be DENIED as moot.

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Court 

Judge assigned to this action pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1). Within twentyone (21) days after being served with a copy of these Findings and Recommendations, any party 

may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should 

be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are 

advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights 

on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 

F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 28, 2020 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00352-DAD-EPG Document 49 Filed 01/28/20 Page 2 of 2