1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BENJAMIN ROBERT GALLEGOS, No. 2:24-cv-2776 TLN CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SAHOTA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 I. INTRODUCTION 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 19 to

. On December 1, 2025, plaintiff filed a pleading titled, “Judicial Notice— 20 Informal Communication Request.” (ECF No. 51.) For the following reasons, no further orders 21 will issue addressing this pleading. 22 II. BACKGROUND 23 On April 8, 2025, this Court ordered service of the following claims raised in plaintiff’s 24 amended complaint: 1) claim one against defendants Chief Physician Sahota and Head Nurse 25 Babbala for allegedly removing plaintiff’s Durable Medical Equipment (“DME”) chronos for a 26 walker, knee brace, back brace and wrist brace in violation of the Eighth Amendment right to 27 adequate medical care; 2) claim two against defendant Hling for allegedly removing plaintiff’s 28 DME chronos in violation of the Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care; 3) claim two 1 against defendants Brown and Leahy for allegedly failing to treat plaintiff’s grievance regarding 2 the removal of the DME chronos as an emergency grievance and/or staff complaint in violation of 3 the Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care; 4) claim three against defendants Sahota 4 and Babbala for allegedly discontinuing plaintiff’s epidural injections in violation of the Eighth 5 Amendment right to adequate medical care; and 5) claim three against defendant Anderson for 6 allegedly preparing documents containing false statements that led to the removal of plaintiff’s 7 DME chronos in violation of the Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care. (ECF No. 8 27.) 9 On July 21, 2025, plaintiff filed a motion for injunctive relief. (ECF No. 42.) Plaintiff 10 requested a court order holding his medical treatment plan and DME chronos “in place.” (Id. at 11 4.) On August 21, 2025, this Court recommended that plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief filed 12 July 21, 2025 be denied. (ECF Nos. 46.) These findings and recommendations are pending 13 before the district court. 14 III. PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE FILED DECEMBER 1, 2025 15 In the request for judicial notice filed December 1, 2025, plaintiff states that he is 16 informing this Court of the recent tactics used to retaliate against plaintiff and to target plaintiff’s 17 chronos, DME’s and to manipulate plaintiff’s housing by wrongful alterations to plaintiff’s DPP 18 Code.1 (ECF No. 51 at 1.) Plaintiff states that his DPP code was improperly changed so that 19 plaintiff would be eligible for transfer to another Level IV prison. (Id. at 2.) After plaintiff 20 “crashed” and went to a mental health crisis bed, plaintiff’s DPP code was restored to the original 21 code. (Id.) Plaintiff states that “they have decided” that they do not want anyone with walkers on 22 this yard. (Id.) Plaintiff states that “the medical doctor is not respecting my right to refuse his 23 treatment (I can’t even get my referral to have my epidural shots Your Honor).” (Id.) Plaintiff 24 states that he previously sought an injunction, but defendants replied that plaintiff’s DME’s were 25

1 DPP appears to refer to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s 26 (“CDCR”) Disability Placement Program, which is designed to protect against discrimination 27 towards disabled inmates and to ensure that participants are housed in facilities offering a range of programming equivalent to that available to non-disabled inmates. See Williams v. CDCR, 28

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2017). 1 |} mplace. (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff states “but here they are again trying to remove my DME’s/walker 2 || and alter my medical to manipulate my housing.” (Id.) Plaintiff states that he is informally 3 | notifying this Court of his plight and laying the foundation if further wrongs are forced on 4 | plaintiff by his current primary care provider. (Id.) Plaintiff requests an order directing that his 5 || “medical to not be altered at all.” (Id.) Plaintiff also requests an order directing that plaintiff be 6 || given spinal epidural injections. (Id.) Plaintiff also states that the primary care physician is 7 || trying to force plaintiff to see him and not following plaintiff's right to refuse his treatment. (Id. 8 | 9 Plaintiff's request for judicial notice is confusing because plaintiff states that the purpose 10 | of this pleading is to provide this Court with information, yet plaintiff also requests orders from 11 || this Court. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b)(1) states that a request for a court order must be 12 || made by motion. A motion for a court order must state with particularity the grounds for seeking 13 || the order and state the relief sought. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1)(B), (C). To the extent plaintiff's 14 || request for judicial notice seeks orders from this Court, plaintiff's request for court orders is 15 || defective because the request is not made by motion as required by Rule 7(b)(1). For this reason, 16 | no further court orders will issue addressing the request for judicial notice.’ 17 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no further court orders will issue 18 || addressing plaintiff's request for judicial notice (ECF No. 51). 19 20 | Dated: December 10, 2025 A aA Aan Spe | CHI SOO KIM 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 | Gall2776.dis(2)/2 25 26 \Q_—_ x Soo do ? Plaintiff's previous filing of a motion for injunctive relief demonstrates plaintiff’s ability to file 28 | a motion for injunctive relief.