Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02474/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02474-3/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

ANTONIO KONTOPEDES,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2474 FCD KJM P

vs.

DAVID L. RUNNELS, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER AND

 / FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

I. Screening The Complaint

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed May 23, 2006, plaintiff's complaint was

dismissed with leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has now filed an amended

complaint.

The amended complaint states a cognizable claim for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). If the allegations of the amended complaint are proven,

plaintiff has a reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits of this action.

II. Motion For Injunctive Relief

On September 7, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction,

seeking an order directing defendants to replace property stolen from him, discontinue acts of

Case 2:05-cv-02474-FCD-KJM Document 20 Filed 03/01/07 Page 1 of 4
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

retaliation, transfer him to a different prison, stop delaying his mail and stop delaying medical

treatment. These requests echo the claims in his complaint. 

The legal principles applicable to a request for preliminary injunctive relief are

well established. “The traditional equitable criteria for granting preliminary injunctive relief are

(1) a strong likelihood of success on the merits, (2) the possibility of irreparable injury to

plaintiff if the preliminary relief is not granted, (3) a balance of hardships favoring the plaintiff,

and (4) advancement of the public interest (in certain cases).” Dollar Rent A Car v. Travelers

Indem. Co., 774 F.2d 1371, 1374 (9th Cir. 1985). The criteria are traditionally treated as

alternative tests. “Alternatively, a court may issue a preliminary injunction if the moving party

demonstrates ‘either a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of

irreparable injury or that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships tips sharply in

his favor.’” Martin v. International Olympic Comm., 740 F.2d 670, 675 (9th Cir. 1984) (quoting

William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 88 (9th Cir.

1975)). The Ninth Circuit has reiterated that under either formulation of the principles, if the

probability of success on the merits is low, preliminary injunctive relief should be denied:

Martin explicitly teaches that “[u]nder this last part of the

alternative test, even if the balance of hardships tips decidedly in

favor of the moving party, it must be shown as an irreducible

minimum that there is a fair chance of success on the merits.”

Johnson v. California State Bd. of Accountancy, 72 F.3d 1427, 1430 (9th Cir. 1995).

Plaintiff has not demonstrated the possibility of irreparable injury, for his

complaint focuses on past acts and his moving papers include only conclusory statements to the

effect that he continues to suffer harm. He has not sufficiently shown an on-going pattern of

deprivations. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Service is appropriate for the following defendants: Correa, Cochrane,

Keating, Vargas, Roach, Felker, Ingwerson, Lyons, Hubbard, Rigney and Lawrence.

Case 2:05-cv-02474-FCD-KJM Document 20 Filed 03/01/07 Page 2 of 4
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

3

2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff eleven USM-285 forms, one

summons, an instruction sheet and a copy of the amended complaint filed December 14, 2006.

3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the court:

a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents;

b. One completed summons;

c. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed in number 1

above; and 

d. Twelve copies of the endorsed amended complaint filed December 14,

2006. 

4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants and need not request waiver of

service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the United States

Marshal to serve the above-named defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4

without payment of costs. 

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s September 7, 2006 motion for

a preliminary injunction be denied. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that 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 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: February 28, 2007.

2/kont2474.1amd

Case 2:05-cv-02474-FCD-KJM Document 20 Filed 03/01/07 Page 3 of 4
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTONIS KONTOPEDES, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2474

vs.

DAVID L. RUNNELS, et al., NOTICE OF SUBMISSION

Defendants. OF DOCUMENTS

 /

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's

order filed :

 1 completed summons form

 11 completed USM-285 forms

 12 copies of December 14, 2006 Amended Complaint

DATED: 

 

Plaintiff

Case 2:05-cv-02474-FCD-KJM Document 20 Filed 03/01/07 Page 4 of 4