Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-00583/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-00583-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

KRZYSZTOF F. WOLINSKI, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

J. LEWIS, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:17-cv-00583 MCE AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, who is a state prisoner, has filed a motion for court order. ECF No. 19. 

Specifically, he seeks an order directing Daniel Paramo, the Warden of the R.J. Donovan 

Correctional Facility (“R.J. Donovan”), to provide him with adequate access to the unit law 

library. Id. at 1. Warden Paramo is not a defendant to this action, however, and the court does 

not have jurisdiction over him. See, e.g., Zepeda v. United States Immigration Service, 753 F.2d 

719, 727 (9th Cir. 1985) (“[A] federal court may [only] issue an injunction 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.”) (emphasis added). Consequently, 

plaintiff’s motion must be denied. 

 The court will, however, request that defendants’ counsel undertake an inquiry into 

plaintiff’s claims that he is being denied law library access. Counsel is not required to investigate 

plaintiff’s claims that such a denial (assuming one is being perpetrated) is premised on retaliation 

Case 2:17-cv-00583-DC-AC Document 20 Filed 09/25/17 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

for protected actions plaintiff has undertaken at R.J. Donovan.1 The court is merely interested in 

determining plaintiff’s level of access to law library resources. Defendants’ counsel should notify 

the court of his findings by way of a short written filing within fourteen days of this order’s entry. 

 It is THEREFORE ORDERED that: 

 1. Plaintiff’s motion for a court order (ECF No. 19) is DENIED; and 

 2. Within fourteen days of this order’s entry defendants’ counsel should file a short 

written statement notifying the court of his findings regarding plaintiff’s law library access. 

DATED: September 25, 2017 

 

1

 Plaintiff may litigate such a claim by filing a separate lawsuit in the appropriate district court. 

Case 2:17-cv-00583-DC-AC Document 20 Filed 09/25/17 Page 2 of 2