Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01621/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01621-7/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

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

LEROY MANNING,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

L. D. ZAMORA, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:12-cv-01621-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COURT 

ORDER DIRECTING PRISON TO 

PROVIDE PLAINTIFF ACCESS TO 

PERSONAL PROPERTY

(Doc. 41.)

I. BACKGROUND

Leroy Manning (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights 

action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action 

on October 3, 2012. (Doc. 1.)

On January 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for a court order directing prison officials 

to provide him with his personal property, particularly his reading glasses. (Doc. 41.)

II. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

The purpose of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo if the balance of 

equities so heavily favors the moving party that justice requires the court to intervene to secure 

Case 1:12-cv-01621-LJO-SAB Document 42 Filed 01/13/15 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

the positions until the merits of the action are ultimately determined. University of Texas v. 

Camenisch, 451 U.S. 390, 395 (1981). A preliminary injunction is available to a plaintiff who 

Ademonstrates either (1) a combination of probable success and the possibility of irreparable 

harm, or (2) that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardship tips in its favor.@ 

Arcamuzi v. Continental Air Lines, Inc., 819 F. 2d 935, 937 (9th Cir. 1987). Under either 

approach the plaintiff Amust demonstrate a significant threat of irreparable injury.@ Id. Also, an 

injunction should not issue if the plaintiff Ashows no chance of success on the merits.@ Id. At a 

bare minimum, the plaintiff Amust demonstrate a fair chance of success of the merits, or 

questions serious enough to require litigation.@ Id.

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, 1665 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation 

of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 757-58 (1982); Jones v. City of 

Los Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir. 2006). 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[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 Service, 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir. 

1985). 

Discussion

Plaintiff is presently incarcerated at High Desert State Prison in Susanville, California. 

Plaintiff seeks a court order requiring prison officials there to provide him with his personal 

property. However, the events at issue in Plaintiff’s Complaint allegedly occurred in 2011 at 

Avenal State Prison in Avenal, California, when Plaintiff was incarcerated there. The order 

Plaintiff seeks would require present actions by persons who are not defendants in this action 

and would not remedy any of the claims upon which this action proceeds. Therefore, the court 

lacks jurisdiction to issue the order sought by Plaintiff, and Plaintiff=s motion must be denied. 

/// 

Case 1:12-cv-01621-LJO-SAB Document 42 Filed 01/13/15 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

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for a court 

order directing prison officials to provide him with his property is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01621-LJO-SAB Document 42 Filed 01/13/15 Page 3 of 3