Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00180/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00180-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MANUEL A. GONZALEZ, 

Plaintiff,

v.

T. MASON; et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-180 SI (pr)

ORDER DENYING TRO 

Plaintiff has filed a motion for a temporary restraining order ("TRO") in which he

requests that twenty-five named defendants be ordered to stay 500 feet away from him and that

plaintiff not be transferred to Salinas Valley State Prison due to the alleged corruption and

threats against him. Defendants have opposed the motion. 

 The standard for issuing a TRO is similar to that required for a preliminary injunction.

See Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. v. United States Dist. Court, 650 F.2d 1004, 1008 (9th Cir.

1981) (Ferguson, J., dissenting). Requests for injunctive relief may be satisfied by either of two

sets of criteria. The "traditional" test requires the movant to: (1) establish a strong likelihood of

success on the merits; (2) show the possibility of irreparable injury to the movant if the

preliminary relief is not granted; (3) show a balance of hardships favoring the movant; and (4)

show that granting the injunction favors the public interest. See Los Angeles Memorial

Coliseum Comm'n v. Nat'l Football League, 634 F.2d 1197, 1200 (9th Cir. 1980). The

"alternative" test requires that the movant demonstrate 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. See Bernhardt v. Los Angeles County, 339 F.3d

Case 3:07-cv-00180-SI Document 40 Filed 12/17/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

920, 925 (9th Cir. 2003). Under either test, the likelihood of success on the merits is important.

The record now before the court does not suggest probable or a strong likelihood of

success on the merits for Gonzalez. The defendants have moved to dismiss the action on the

ground that administrative remedies were not exhausted before the action, and Gonzalez's

opposition has not yet been filed, nor has he indicated what his response to the non-exhaustion

argument will be. 

Gonzalez also has failed to persuade the court with his showing of the irreparable injury

he allegedly will face if moved back to Salinas Valley. His weak evidentiary showing is even

more problematic because the requested relief would affect state prison operations and

defendants have stated that the housing options are very limited due to Gonzalez's case factors.

The court will not issue the requested TRO because plaintiff has not made a convincing showing

of a real need for such an order and, more importantly, it would interfere with the day-to-day

operations of the state prisons. See Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 84-86; see also Wright v.

Rushen, 642 F.2d 1129, 1132 (9th Cir. 1981) (courts should avoid enmeshing themselves in

minutiae of prison operations in name of constitution). 

The motion for a TRO is denied. (Docket # 26.) Plaintiff's request for an extension of

time to serve his reply on defendants is DENIED. (Docket # 37.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 17, 2007 ______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00180-SI Document 40 Filed 12/17/07 Page 2 of 2