Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00251/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00251-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

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

TONY PHELPS, Sr.

Plaintiffs,

 v.

MARGARET MIMMS, JERRY DYER,

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:14-cv-251-AWI-BAM 

ORDER ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 

INJUNCTION (ECF No. 7)

Plaintiff Tony Phelps, Sr. (“Plaintiff”) appears to be a pretrial detainee1proceeding pro se 

and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff names 

Margaret Mimms and Jerry Dyer as defendants. On March 5, 2014, Plaintiff filed a consent to 

jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge.

On April 8, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for relief related to being deprived of medical 

treatment and deprived of use of the law library and legal material. The Court construes 

Plaintiff’s motion as a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. 

Plaintiff is housed in the Fresno County Jail. Plaintiff complains that he is concerned he will be 

retaliated against at the Fresno County Jail because he has filed this lawsuit. He complains that 

his eye glasses were taken from him, that he has high blood pressure and related heart problems. 

He alleges he also has separated rotor cups in his arms causing pain, herniated discs, mental 

 

1 The allegations are unclear if Plaintiff is a pretrial detainee or a sentenced prisoner. For purposes of this order, 

the Court will assume Plaintiff is a pretrial detainee.

Case 1:14-cv-00251-BAM Document 11 Filed 05/27/14 Page 1 of 3
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

illness for which he needs medications, and other ailments. He complains that he has not seen 

any medical doctors and his medical request slips are unanswered.

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

v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24, 129 S.Ct. 365, 376, 172 L.Ed.2d 249 

(2008) (citation omitted). “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is 

likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of 

preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the 

public interest.” Id. at 20 (citations omitted). An injunction may only be awarded upon a clear 

showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. Id. at 22 (citation omitted) (emphasis added).

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, and as a preliminary matter, the court 

must have before it an actual case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 

103 S.Ct. 1660, 75 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for 

Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 70 L.Ed.2d 700 (1982). 

If the court does not have an actual case or controversy before it, it has no power to hear the 

matter in question. Id. Thus, “[a] federal court may issue an injunction [only] if it has personal 

jurisdiction over the parties and 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 and 

Naturalization Serv., 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir.1983); see Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(d) (listing persons 

bound by injunction).

The Court takes Plaintiff’s assertions seriously, but lacks jurisdiction to issue the relief 

requested. In a separate order issued concurrently, Plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed with 

leave to amend. Thus, at this time, Plaintiff is not entitled to any preliminary injunction because 

there is no case or controversy and the Court lacks jurisdiction to issue any injunctive relief. 

Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief shall be denied without prejudice to refiling. However, 

Plaintiff is cautioned that the Fresno County Jail is not a party to this action and the Court lacks

///

///

Case 1:14-cv-00251-BAM Document 11 Filed 05/27/14 Page 2 of 3
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

jurisdiction to issue or enforce an injunction against a non-party. In re Estate of Ferdinand 

Marcos, 94 F.3d 539, 545 (9th Cir. 1996).

For the reasons stated, Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary 

injunction is DENIED without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 23, 2014 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00251-BAM Document 11 Filed 05/27/14 Page 3 of 3