Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01085/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01085-2/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TAI EDMUND FRED ABREU, 

Plaintiff,

v.

CAVINESS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO 

DENY PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR 

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR LACK OF 

JURISDICTION 

(Doc. 14) 

30-DAY DEADLINE

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME FOR 

PLAINTIFF TO FILE A CERTIFIED COPY OF 

HIS TRUST ACCOUNT STATEMENTS 

(Doc. 9) 

60-DAY DEADLINE

On August 26, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis

and allowed him sixty days to submit a certified copy of his trust account statement for the sixmonth period immediately preceding the filing of the Complaint. (Doc. 9.) On November 2, 

2015, Plaintiff filed a motion describing his multiple, yet unfruitful, efforts to obtain a certified 

copy of his trust account statement and requesting an order compelling prison staff to provide it to 

him. (Doc. 14.) The Court construes Plaintiff's motion as seeking injunctive relief. 

Notably, federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and in considering a request for 

preliminary injunctive relief, the Court is bound by the requirement that, as a preliminary matter, 

Case 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT Document 15 Filed 11/05/15 Page 1 of 3
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

it have before it an actual case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 

(1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 

U.S. 464, 471 (1982). If the Court does not have an actual case or controversy before it, it has no 

power to hear the matter in question. Id. Requests for prospective relief are further limited by 18 

U.S.C. ' 3626(a)(1)(A) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which requires that the Court find 

the Arelief [sought] is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violation 

of the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of the 

Federal right.@ 

Moreover, the pendency of this action does not give the Court jurisdiction over prison 

officials in general or over the conditions of Plaintiff=s confinement. Summers v. Earth Island 

Institute, 555 U.S. 488, 492-93 (2009); Mayfield v. United States, 599 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 

2010). Rather, the Court’s jurisdiction is limited to the parties in this action and to the cognizable 

legal claims upon which this action is proceeding. Summers, 555 U.S. at 492-93; Mayfield, 599 

F.3d at 969.

In his motion, Plaintiff does not seek injunctive relief against any of the Defendants 

named in this action. AA federal court may issue an injunction [only] if it has personal 

jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter jurisdiction over the claim; it may not attempt to 

determine the rights of persons not before the court.@ Zepeda v. United States Immigration 

Service, 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir. 1985) (emphasis added). Thus, the Court must deny 

Plaintiff=s motion because it lacks jurisdiction over those in the Inmate Trust Office who, he 

reports, have failed to provide him certified copies of his trust account. 

The seriousness of accusations concerning obstructing Plaintiff’s access to certified copies 

of his trust account to pursue this action cannot and do not overcome what is a jurisdictional bar. 

Steel Co., 523 U.S. at 103-04 (A[The] triad of injury in fact, causation, and redressability 

constitutes the core of Article III=s case-or-controversy requirement, and the party invoking 

federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing its existence.@). This motion is simply not the 

Case 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT Document 15 Filed 11/05/15 Page 2 of 3
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

3

proper vehicle for conveyance of the relief Plaintiff seeks. 1

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Based upon the foregoing, the Court RECOMMENDS:

1. That Plaintiff=s motion for injunctive relief, filed November 2, 2015 (Doc. 14), be 

DENIED for lack of jurisdiction;

2. That the Clerk’s Office be directed to forward a copy of this order and Plaintiff's 

motion to the Warden's office and to Litigation Coordinator at High Desert State Prison via 

facsimile transfer that they might be made aware of Plaintiff's safety concerns. 

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(l). Within 30

days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. The document should be captioned AObjections 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).

ORDER

1. Plaintiff's deadline to submit a certified copy of his trust account for the six month 

period immediately preceding his filing of this action is extend to 60 days from the date of service 

of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 5, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

1

Plaintiff=s motion also fails to make the requisite showing, supported by admissible evidence, to obtain a 

preliminary injunction. Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20-4, 129 S.Ct. 365, 376 

(2008). However, it is unnecessary to reach the merits of Plaintiff=s motions in light of the fact that the jurisdictional 

issue is fatal to his requests for relief. Summers, 555 U.S. at 493, 129 S.Ct. at 1149; Mayfield, 599 F.3d at 969. 

Case 1:15-cv-01085-AWI-JLT Document 15 Filed 11/05/15 Page 3 of 3