Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00040/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00040-7/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

PETER ANAYA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CDCR,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 1:16-cv-00040-MJS (PC)

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR 

DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE 

RELIEF

(ECF No. 38)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has consented to Magistrate 

Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 4.) No other parties have appeared in the action. 

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s September 24, 2015 request for declaratory and 

injunctive relief. (ECF No. 38.) Plaintiff seeks a court order requiring that CDCR cease 

unspecified unlawful conduct.

To the extent Plaintiff’s request is intended as a supplement to his complaint, it is 

moot. Plaintiff’s complaint was superseded by a first, second, third, and fourth amended 

complaint. The fourth amended complaint recently was dismissed with leave to amend. 

(ECF No. 116.) If Plaintiff wishes to bring claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, he 

may do so in his fifth amended complaint.

Case 1:16-cv-00040-MJS Document 117 Filed 04/01/16 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

To the extent Plaintiff seeks preliminary injunctive relief, the Court finds no basis 

for awarding such relief. Injunctive relief, whether temporary or permanent, is an 

“extraordinary remedy, never awarded as of right.” Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 

555 U.S. 7, 22 (2008). “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.” Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 

F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Winter, 555 U.S. at 20). 

Plaintiff heretofore has failed to state a cognizable claim and there presently is no 

operative pleading in this matter. The Court therefore cannot conclude that Plaintiff is 

likely to succeed on the merits of any claims. Plaintiff also fails to suggest a real and 

immediate threat of irreparable injury. See City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 

101–102 (1983) (plaintiff must show “real and immediate” threat of injury, and “[p]ast

exposure to illegal conduct does not in itself show a present case or controversy 

regarding injunctive relief . . . if unaccompanied by any continuing, present, adverse 

effects.”). The Court finds nothing to tip the balance of equities in Plaintiff’s favor. And, 

while the public has an interest in providing inmates with constitutionally adequate 

conditions of confinement, the record before the Court does not justify the Court 

substituting its judgment for that of correctional staff. These criteria not having been met, 

Plaintiff is not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request for declaratory and injunctive relief is HEREBY 

DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 1, 2016 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00040-MJS Document 117 Filed 04/01/16 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

Case 1:16-cv-00040-MJS Document 117 Filed 04/01/16 Page 3 of 3