Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00029/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00029-2/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

DEMOND. MIMMS,

Plaintiff, CV F 06 0029 AWI WMW P

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

 RE MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

 (DOCUMENT 3 )

J. KLARICH, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Pending before the court is Plaintiff’s

motion for injunctive relief.

Plaintiff has been denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. Specifically,

Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis was denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g),

on the ground that Plaintiff has suffered three prior dismissals on the grounds of frivolousness or

failure to state a claim. Plaintiff has sought an extension of time in which to file objections to

the court’s recommendation of dismissal for his failure to pay the filing fee. Until such time as

Plaintiff pays the filing fee in full, this action can not proceed.

Further, Plaintiff has not stated a claim as to any of the defendants, and no defendant has

been served or filed a response. The court must have personal jurisdiction over the parties to be

enjoined; it may not enjoin defendants not yet served or before the court. Zepeda v. United

Case 1:06-cv-00029-AWI-WMW Document 10 Filed 08/11/06 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

States I.N.S., 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir. 1983).

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

relief 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)(B). Within thirty

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

objections with the court. Such a 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 10, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

mmkd34 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00029-AWI-WMW Document 10 Filed 08/11/06 Page 2 of 2