Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01618/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01618-0/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

WILLIAM BRADLEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. VILLA, et al., 

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-1618-LJO-MJS (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR LIBRARY ACCESS BE

DENIED 

(ECF No. 7)

OBJECTIONS DUE IN THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff William Bradley (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 20,

2010, Plaintiff filed a document asking the Court to order the prison library staff to grant

him access to the law library for the next forty-five days. (ECF No. 7.) The Court construes

this as a motion for injunctive relief. 

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 (1983); 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. 

Plaintiff’s complaint in this action alleges that Defendants violated his Eighth

Amendment rights by the use of excessive force. (ECF No. 1.) Any orders relating to law

library access would not remedy the claim upon which this action proceeds. The Court

therefore lacks jurisdiction to issue the order sought by plaintiff. Accordingly, the Court

RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff’s request for access to the law library be DENIED. 

Case 1:10-cv-01618-LJO-GSA Document 8 Filed 10/07/10 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

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 thirty (30) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, the

Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. Any such 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. Y1st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 7, 2010 /s/Michael J. Seng 

ci4d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

-2-

Case 1:10-cv-01618-LJO-GSA Document 8 Filed 10/07/10 Page 2 of 2