Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01373/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01373-2/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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KENNY CALIHAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01373-YNP PC

ORDER RE MOTIONS

(Doc. 11, 12, 13, 14)

Plaintiff Kenny Calihan (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court are four of

Plaintiff’s motions. On August 26, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the Court order

Defendants to furnish a copy of his trust account statement. (Doc. #12.) On August 27, 2009,

Plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order because Defendant Castro threatened to

retaliate against Plaintiff for this lawsuit. (Doc. #11.) On August 28, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion

for a temporary restraining orderrequesting that the Court require prison officials to deliver Plaintiff

his mail without delay. (Doc. #13.) On August 31, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary

restraining order preventing Defendant Morrison from harassing Plaintiff. (Doc. #14.) Plaintiff has

consented to jurisdiction by U.S. Magistrate Judge. (Doc. #5.)

The Court notes that Plaintiff’s motion for the court to order Defendants to furnish a certified

copy of Plaintiff’s trust account statement appears to be moot. The Court received copies of

Plaintiff’s trust account statement on September 10, 2009 and September 14, 2009. (Docs. #15, 16.) 

Plaintiff’s motion will therefore be denied as moot.

1

Case 1:09-cv-01373-LJO-MJS Document 20 Filed 01/08/10 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

Defendants have not been served with Plaintiff’s complaint and have not otherwise made an

appearance in this action. There is no indication in Plaintiff’s motion that Plaintiff has made any

attempt to provide Defendants with notice of his request for a temporary restraining order. Plaintiff

is advised that under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(B), a party requesting a temporary

restraining order without written or oral notice to the adverse party must “certify in writing any

efforts made to give notice and the reasons why it should not be required.” Plaintiff has not certified

in writing what efforts he made to give notice to Defendants or the reasons why notice should not

be required. On that basis Plaintiff’s motions for temporary restraining orders will be denied.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s August 26, 2009 motion requesting the Court to order Defendants to

furnish a copy of his trust statement is DENIED as moot;

2. Plaintiff’s August 27, 2009 motion for a temporary restraining order is DENIED;

3. Plaintiff’s August 28, 2009 motion for a temporary restraining orderis DENIED; and

4. Plaintiff’s August 31, 2009 motion for a temporary restraining order is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 8, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:09-cv-01373-LJO-MJS Document 20 Filed 01/08/10 Page 2 of 2