Opinion
2:20-cv-773 TLN DB P
06-14-2021
CHARLES WINDHAM, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner who was proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff alleged that defendants violated his rights by taking items from his cell. This case was dismissed for failure to comply with court orders and failure to prosecute on April 14, 2021. (ECF Nos. 21, 22.)
Plaintiff has now filed a notice informing the court that he is in danger. He alleges that prison officials have not taken sufficient action to protect him after prison gangs threatened to kill him. He asks the court to send “FBI, U.S. Marshals, Assistant U.S. Attorney” and seeks to prevent a transfer back to Mule Creek State Prison.
To the extent plaintiff believes his rights have been violated and he is in danger, he cannot pursue relief via this action which has been closed. Additionally, the allegations contained in his notice do not relate to the allegations contained in the complaint filed in this case. Thus, the relief sought cannot be granted because it would be directed toward individuals who are not parties to this action, Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 110 (1969) (“It is elementary that one is not bound by a judgment ... resulting from litigation in which he is not designated as a party ....”), and the relief sought is unrelated to plaintiffs underlying claims in this action, Pacific Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen's Medical Center, 810 F.3d 631, 633 (9th Cir. 2015) (“When a plaintiff seeks injunctive relief based on claims not pled in the complaint, the court does not have authority to issue an injunction.”). Plaintiff is advised file a separate action seeking relief based on the allegations contained in this filing.
Plaintiff has also stated that the present action was dismissed because Mule Creek State Prison staff stole his legal mail. He further states that the warden and correctional officer Cook gave plaintiff to the Nazi Low Riders and Aryan Brotherhood prison gangs. He was “involuntarily drugged, sedated, repeatedly raped, tortured, terrorized, sleep-deprived, brainwashed, ‘brain-seeded' (w[ith] sodium pentothal).” (ECF No. 23 at 2.)
If plaintiff would like to challenge the order of judgment in this case based on the confiscation of his legal mail, plaintiff is advised to file a motion for relief from judgment of this action along with a proposed amended complaint. Any such motion should clearly set forth the reason he failed to respond to the court's prior orders.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the relief sought in plaintiffs notice (ECF No. 23) is denied. Should plaintiff seek to reopen this action he should file a motion for relief from judgment within thirty days of the date of this order along with a proposed amended complaint.