*1 Case 3:12-cv-00250-PA Document 7 Filed 03/16/12 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

RYAN BONNEAU,

PIa iff, Case No. 3:12-CV-250-PA v. ORDER

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,

et al.,

Defendants.

PANNER, District Judge.

Plaintiff, an inmate at FCI- ridan, has moved a liminary injunct wherein the court prevents defendants from using any of his di inary incident reports against him when

ewing his application for placement in a Residential Re-entry Center. In this way, asks the court to immediately invalidate all underlying disc inary sanctions inst him.

Defendants have yet to be served with the Complaint this action. Fed. R. Ci v. P. 4 (1) (requiring proof of service).

refore, the court cannot enforce an injunction against Zepeda v. INS, 753 F.2d 719 (9 th Cir. 1985) ral fendant. 1 - ORDER

I ~ Case 3:12-cv-00250-PA Document 7 Filed 03/16/12 Page 2 of 2

court may issue injunction if it has personal jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter jurisdiction over the claim).

Even if this were not the case, plaintiff is attempting to secure a preliminary injunction to change the status quo. A request for a mandatory injunction seeking reI f well beyond the status quo is disfavored and shall not be granted un ss the facts and law clearly favor the moving party. Stanley v. Univ. of S. Cal., 13 F.3d 1313, 1319-20 (9th Cir. 1994). There is no such showing in this case. For these reasons, Motion Preliminary Injunction (#3) is DENIED.

CONCLUSION

Plainti 's Motion r Preliminary Injunction (#3) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED

DATED this -Lit day of March, 2012.

~1ft~

Owen M. Panner

Uni State District Judge 2 - ORDER