Opinion
No. 1:18-cv-01074-DAD-GSA (PC)
05-08-2020
GREGORY L. FLETCHER, Plaintiff, v. STU SHERMAN, Warden, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, REVOKING PLAINTIFF'S IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELEASE (Doc. Nos. 9, 17)
Plaintiff Gregory L. Fletcher is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On October 9, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that plaintiff's in forma pauperis status be revoked and that plaintiff be required to pay the $400.00 filing fee for this action in full. (Doc. No. 9.) The findings and recommendations were served on both parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of service. (Id. at 4.) On October 17, 2018, plaintiff filed timely objections. (Doc. No. 10.) /////
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiff's objections, the court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
In his objections, plaintiff fails to meaningfully respond to the magistrate judge's analysis, but instead merely restates the conclusory allegations contained in his complaint and provides no basis for the court to depart from the magistrate judge's reasoned conclusion that plaintiff is ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis with this action. (Doc. No. 10.)
Separately, plaintiff filed a "Motion for Release Due to Coronavirus Pandemic" on May 4, 2020, seeking release from prison due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. (Doc. No. 17.) He argues that he is at heightened risk of contracting COVID-19 because he is African-American and has a myriad of co-morbidities that increase the likeliness that he will contract or succumb to the disease, particularly because of the prison's alleged susceptibility to an outbreak of COVID-19. (Doc. No. 3 at 3.)
However, the court cannot grant plaintiff's motion. Because plaintiff seeks a court order compelling prison officials to release him, the court construes his motion as a motion for injunctive relief. However, an injunction is only available when the "complaint states a sound basis for equitable relief," a determination that implicates "case or controversy considerations[.]" City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102-03 (1983) (citation omitted). In his complaint filed in this action, plaintiff alleges that defendant improperly denied him a job at the prison due to retaliation from prison staff and disability discrimination. (Doc. No. 1.) Because the injunctive relief sought—release from prison—would not remedy his claims and has no connection to them, plaintiff has not "demonstrate[d] a case or controversy . . . that would justify the equitable relief sought," depriving the court of jurisdiction. City of Los Angeles, 461 U.S. at 105. Thus, plaintiff's "Motion for Release Due to Coronavirus Pandemic" must be denied.
This order is without prejudice to plaintiff's filing of a separate civil rights action challenging the conditions of his confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Administrative requests and causes of action under state law may also provide plaintiff potential avenues for seeking that relief may also be available to plaintiff. --------
Accordingly:
1. The findings and recommendations filed on October 9, 2018 (Doc. No. 9) are adopted;
2. Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is revoked;
3. The order issued on August 17, 2018 (Doc. No. 7) granting Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 4) and directing the California Department of Corrections to collect and forward payment from plaintiff's prison trust account is vacated;
4. Plaintiff is directed to pay the $400.00 filing fee within thirty (30) days of service of this order in order to proceed with this action or he will face dismissal of this case without prejudice to its refiling upon payment of the required filing fee;
5. Plaintiff's "Motion for Release Due to Coronavirus Pandemic" (Doc. No. 17) is denied; and
6. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on:
IT IS SO ORDERED.i. the Financial Department, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California; and
ii. the Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Dated: May 8 , 2020
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE