Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01089/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01089-13/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

 GARRISON S. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff, No. 1:06-cv-1089 ALA P

vs.

W.J. SULLIVAN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

____________________________/

Plaintiff Garrison S. Johnson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 29, 2006, plaintiff filed a

motion for a temporary restraining order and/or a preliminary injunction. On February 28, 2008,

defendants filed a response in opposition. Plaintiff filed a reply to defendant’s response on

March 12, 2008. 

I

The legal principles applicable to a request for injunctive relief are well established. To

prevail, the moving party must show either a likelihood of success on the merits and the

possibility of irreparable injury, or that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships

tips sharply in the movant’s favor. See Coalition for Economic Equity v. Wilson, 122 F.3d 692,

700 (9th Cir. 1997); Oakland Tribune, Inc. v. Chronicle Publ’g Co., 762 F.2d 1374, 1376 (9th

Cir. 1985). The two formulations represent two points on a sliding scale with the focal point

being the degree of irreparable injury shown. Oakland Tribune, 762 F.2d at 1376. “Under any

Case 1:06-cv-01089-ALA -GSA Document 45 Filed 03/19/08 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

2

formulation of the test, plaintiff must demonstrate that there exists a significant threat of

irreparable injury.” Id. In the absence of a significant showing of possible irreparable harm, the

court need not reach the issue of likelihood of success on the merits. Id.

In cases brought by prisoners involving conditions of confinement, any preliminary

injunction “must be narrowly drawn, extend no further than necessary to correct the harm the

court finds requires preliminary relief, and be the least intrusive means necessary to correct the

harm.” 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(2).

Plaintiff requests the court grant him a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary

injunction directing defendants to transfer plaintiff to a prison that does not segregate prisoners

according to race. Plaintiff claims that he will be subject to irreparable harm if not granted this

request because he would be precluded from pursuing an equal protection claim. However, this

court has already ordered defendants to answer plaintiff’s complaint concerning his equal

protection claim. Plaintiff therefore has failed to show that he will be irreparably harmed if not

granted a temporary restraining order and/or a preliminary injunction. As such his motion will

be denied. 

III

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s December 29, 2006, motion for a

temporary restraining order and/or a preliminary injunction is DENIED. 

/////

DATED: March 18, 2008

/s/ Arthur L. Alarcón 

 UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE

Sitting by Designation

Case 1:06-cv-01089-ALA -GSA Document 45 Filed 03/19/08 Page 2 of 2