Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00569/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00569-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
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

KENNETH R. HUSKEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

PAM AHLIN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-00569-SKO PC

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF,

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

(Docs. 10 and 16)

Plaintiff Kenneth R. Huskey, a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on April 12, 2012. This action is proceeding

against Defendants Ahlin, Brown, Craig, Wagoner, Lintz, Rogers, and Young for failing to ensure

that Plaintiff’s medical needs were met, in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth

Amendment. Plaintiff’s claim arises out his need for cotton clothing due an allergy to wool and

polyester.

On January7, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking an order authorizing him to purchase allcotton clothing and on May 6, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting the issuance of an order

directing the replacement or return of the all-cotton clothing which was lost, stolen, or confiscated

from Plaintiff.

“A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right.” Winter v.

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24, 129 S.Ct. 365, 376 (2008) (citation

omitted). “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

1

Case 1:12-cv-00569-AWI-SKO Document 19 Filed 06/04/13 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

balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Id. at 20

(citations omitted). An injunction may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is

entitled to relief. Id. at 22 (citation omitted) (emphasis added).

However, as an initial matter, “a court has no power to adjudicate a personal claim or

obligation unless it has jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.” Zenith Radio Corp. v.

Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 110, 89 S.Ct. 1562 (1969) (emphasis added); S.E.C. v. Ross,

504 F.3d 1130, 1138-39 (9th Cir. 2007). In this case, no defendant has yet made an appearance; the

United States Marshal is still attempting to either obtain waivers of service or personally serve the

named defendants, which will then trigger their obligation to file a response to the complaint. 

Whatever merit there might otherwise be to Plaintiff’s requests for a preliminary injunction, at this

juncture the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendants and it cannot issue an order

requiring them to take any action. Zenith Radio Corp., 395 U.S. at 110; Ross, 504 F.3d at 1138-39.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motions for preliminary injunctive relief are HEREBY ORDERED

DENIED, without prejudice to renewal once the defendants have made an appearance in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 4, 2013 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

ie14hj UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:12-cv-00569-AWI-SKO Document 19 Filed 06/04/13 Page 2 of 2