Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00741/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00741-9/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD A. HOLCOMB,

Plaintiff, CV F 06 0741 OWW WMW PC 

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

RE MOTION FOR TEMPORARY 

RESTRAINING ORDER (DOC 21)

MTA AMAYA, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action. Plaintiff,

formerly incarcerated at Corcoran State Prison, brings this action challenging his medical care

while housed at Corcoran.

Plaintiff seeks an order from the Court directing defendants to continue Plaintiff on the

medication that was discontinued, and to schedule surgery for his back. Plaintiff is no longer

incarcerated, and is no longer subject to the custody and control of officials at CSP Corcoran. 

When an inmate seeks injunctive or declaratory relief concerning the prison where he is

incarcerated, his claims for such relief become moot when he is no longer subjected to those

conditions. See Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975); Enrico's, Inc. v. Rice, 730 F.2d

1250, 1255 (9th Cir. 1984). Accordingly, plaintiff's request should be denied as moot. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary

Case 1:06-cv-00741-OWW -WMW Document 29 Filed 03/11/08 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

2

restraining order be denied.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within ten days

after being served with 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.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v.

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9 Cir. 1991). th

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 11, 2008 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

j14hj0 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00741-OWW -WMW Document 29 Filed 03/11/08 Page 2 of 2