Opinion
CV F 04-6658 REC DLB P, Findings and recommendations re Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining order [Doc 14].
December 12, 2005
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 6, 2005, plaintiff filed a second motion for temporary restraining order seeking an order requiring defendants to provide access to the law library.
As plaintiff has been advised, "[a] federal court may issue an injunction 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). Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint, which the Court has not yet screened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff is not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief until such time as the court finds that his complaint contains cognizable claims for relief against the named defendants and the named defendants have been served with the summons and complaint. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief is once again premature. Plaintiff is advised once again that further motions for preliminary injunctive relief that are filed before defendants are served with process in this case will be denied as premature.
Based on the foregoing, the court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order, filed on December 6, 2005, be denied, without prejudice, as premature.
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)(1). Within twenty (20) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections 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).
IT IS SO ORDERED.