Cisnero

(PC) Hearns v. Cisnero

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 8, 20221:22-cv-01033California665 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CLARENCE L. HEARNS, Case No.: 1:22-cv-01033-JLT-CDB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING

13 v. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY

INJUNCTION AND TEMPORARY

14 CISNERO, et al., RESTRAINING ORDER 15 Defendants. (Docs. 3, 13) 16 17 Clarence L. Hearns is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief restraining SATF “employees, as well as subcontractors 21 and JPay employees” from confiscating “JPay-5 Tablets” and from removing or discontinuing the 22 “JPay wifi and kiosk.” (Doc. 3.) As an initial matter, the assigned magistrate judge found that 23 because the defendants have not been served, “this Court does not have personal jurisdiction over 24 the named defendants and may not act at this…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.