(PC) Hampton v. Alkire

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GARY G. HAMPTON, No. 2: 19-cv-1660 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ALKIRE, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on plaintiff’s complaint against defendants Alkire and Hicks. Both defendants are employed at High Desert State Prison (“HDSP”). Plaintiff alleges that defendants Alkire and Hicks jeopardized his safety by falsifying documents.

21 On September 18, 2019, plaintiff filed a letter with the court alleging that ever since he filed this lawsuit against defendant Alkire, he has received unfair punishment, placed in unsafe housing situations and been assaulted. (ECF No. 12.) At the time plaintiff filed his September 18, 2019 letter, he was housed at HDSP.

25 Because no defendants had been served yet, pursuant to the All Writs Act, the undersigned ordered the HDSP Warden to respond to plaintiff’s September 18, 2019 letter. (ECF No. 13.) On October 10, 2019, the HDSP Warden filed a response to plaintiff’s September 18, 2019 letter. (ECF No. 24.)

1 Court records indicate that plaintiff is no longer housed at HDSP. Plaintiff is now housed | at the California Medical Facility (“CMF”). Because plaintiff is no longer housed at HDSP, the | undersigned recommends that plaintiff's request for injunctive relief contained in his September | 18, 2019 letter be denied. See Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 149 (1975) (when an inmate | seeks injunctive or declaratory relief concerning the prison where he is incarcerated, his claims | for such relief become moot when he is no longer subjected to those conditions); Dilley v. Gunn, | □□ F.3d 1365, 1368-69 (9th Cir. 1995).

8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall appoint a | district judge to this action; and 10 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiffs request for injunctive relief contained | in his September 18, 2019 CECF No. 12.) letter be denied.

12 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen days | after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written | objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the | objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The | parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to || appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Y1st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

20 | Dated: November 1, 2019 Aectl Aharon 22 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Hamp1660.inj(2).ke