Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00707/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00707-1/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

BILLY JOE SPENCER,

Plaintiff,

v.

P.D. BRAZELTON, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE No. 1:14-cv-00707-MJS

ORDER CLARIFYING PLAINTIFF’S 

OBLIGATIONS REGARDING SERVICE 

AND FILING FEE AND DENYING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR AN 

EXTENSION OF TIME AND FOR 

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

(ECF Nos. 6 and 8)

Plaintiff Billy Joe Spencer is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 2, 2014, 

Plaintiff filed a motion seeking clarification of his responsibility to serve the Defendants 

with copies of orders filed in this action. (ECF No. 6.) On June 13, 2014, Plaintiff filed a 

motion for an extension of time to submit a portion of his filing fee. (ECF No. 8.) 

Plaintiff’s motion also requested preliminary injunctive relief. (Id.)

I. SERVICE

Plaintiff’s June 2, 2014 motion asks to what extent he is required to serve the 

Defendants with copies of court filings in this action. He has no such obligation.

“A pro se plaintiff need not serve documents on counsel for a defendant.” (First 

Informational Order, ECF No. 3 at 4.) Plaintiff is entitled to the appointment of the U.S. 

Case 1:14-cv-00707-MJS Document 9 Filed 06/20/14 Page 1 of 3
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

Marshal to serve process on his behalf because he is proceeding in forma pauperis. 28 

U.S.C. §1915(d); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). 

(However, the Marshal will not be directed by the Court to initiate service of the 

complaint until the Court has screened Plaintiff’s complaint and determined that it states 

a cognizable claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff is directed to page four of the First 

Information Order for an explanation regarding screening and service of process. (ECF 

No. 3.))

II. EXTENSION OF TIME

Plaintiff requests an extension of time to gather the funds necessary to pay the 

Court’s filing fee for this case. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time is 

denied as moot. Plaintiff is not required to personally collect money and send a payment 

to the Court. Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis in this action and therefore his 

payments towards the total filing fee are made by his correctional facility through his 

prison trust account. The payment process is described in the Court’s May 20, 2012 

order granting Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application. (ECF No. 4.)

III. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Plaintiffs June 13, 2014 motion also requests preliminary injunctive relief to assist 

him in securing his litigation file.

A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right. 

Winter v. Natural Res. Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008) (citation omitted). For 

each form of relief sought in federal court, Plaintiff must establish standing. Summers v. 

Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493 (2009) (citation omitted); Mayfield v. United 

States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted). This requires Plaintiff to 

show that he is under threat of suffering an injury in fact that is concrete and 

particularized; the threat must be actual and imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; it 

must be fairly traceable to challenged conduct of the defendant; and it must be likely that 

a favorable judicial decision will prevent or redress the injury. Id. Further, any award of 

equitable relief is governed by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which provides in 

Case 1:14-cv-00707-MJS Document 9 Filed 06/20/14 Page 2 of 3
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

3

relevant part, “Prospective relief in any civil action with respect to prison conditions shall 

extend no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right of a 

particular plaintiff or plaintiffs. The court shall not grant or approve any prospective relief 

unless the court finds that such relief is narrowly drawn, extends no further than 

necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means 

necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right.” 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A).

The Court has not yet screened Plaintiff’s complaint. Until the Court reviews the 

pleading and determines which claims are cognizable and appropriately raised in this 

action, the Court lacks jurisdiction to issue any preliminary injunctions. 18 U.S.C. § 

3626(a)(1)(A); Summers, 555 U.S. at 493; Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969.

IV. CONCLUSION

Plaintiff is not required to take any steps to serve the Defendants at this stage of 

the proceedings or make filing fee payments directly to the Court. Plaintiff’s motion for 

an extension of time and preliminary injunctive relief (ECF No. 8) is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 20, 2014 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00707-MJS Document 9 Filed 06/20/14 Page 3 of 3