Lotusflower v. Headley

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE NONNIE MARCELLA LOTUSFLOWER, CASE NO. C24-5948-JCC-MLP Plaintiff, MINUTE ORDER 11 v. CHARLOTTE HEADLEY, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C.

16 Coughenour, United States District Judge: 17 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 30). A court may issue a TRO if “specific facts . . . clearly show that immediate . . . injury” will result. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1)(A) (emphasis added). The purpose of a TRO is to “preserv[e] the status quo and prevent[] irreparable harm just so long as is necessary to hold a hearing [on the preliminary injunction motion], and no longer.” Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, 415 U.S. 423, 439 (1974). Though Plaintiff’s allegations are admittedly harrowing, they do not demonstrate the immediacy that is required for this Court to enter relief so extraordinary as a TRO, nor do they involve a request to preserve the status quo. This is especially so where Plaintiff’s requested relief involves being transferred out of a facility that she has resided in for over a month now. (Dkt. No. 30 at 1) (Plaintiff has been in her current facility since “Jan. 30, 2025,” and asks to be placed back in her former facility, “WCCW”). Moreover, Defendants have now notified the Court of their intent to respond to Plaintiff’s motion. (Dkt. No. 33 at 1.) These circumstances essentially convert Plaintiff’s motion for a TRO and preliminary injunction into one that purely seeks a preliminary injunction.

6 Accordingly, the Court CONSTRUES Plaintiff’s motion (Dkt. No. 30) as a motion for a preliminary injunction. The Court further REFERS Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 30) and her related motion for a subpoena (Dkt. No. 27) to the Honorable Michelle L. Peterson, United States Magistrate Judge, per the procedures outlined in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and this Court’s Local Magistrate Judge Rules.

11 DATED this 21st day of March 2025.

Ravi Subramanian Clerk of Court s/Kathleen Albert Deputy Clerk