RAMSEY v. HUGHES et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
JAVONTE’ RAMSEY,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 3:25-cv-202-MW-ZCB
CAPTAIN HUGHES, et al.,
Defendants.
_______________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This prisoner civil rights case is before the Court on Plaintiff’s
motion for a preliminary injunction. 	(Doc. 142). 	For the reasons below,
Plaintiff’s motion should be denied.
First, Plaintiff’s motion lacks merit because he seeks an injunction
against people who are not named as Defendants in this action. 	The
defendants 	named 	in 	the 	complaint 	are 	Captain 	Hughes, 	Officer
Gonzalez, Officer Ellis, and Officer Hamm from Santa Rosa Correctional
Institution. (Doc. 33 at 2-4). The individuals named in Plaintiff’s motion
for a preliminary injunction are Mrs. Gibson, Captain Burrow, Ms. Coxe,
Officer Johnson, Sergeant Cederlof, “other nurses,” and the “legal mail
lady.” 	(Doc. 142 at 2-3). 	None of these individuals is a party to this
action. 	Thus, the Court may not enter an injunction against them. 	See
Case 3:25-cv-00202-MW-ZCB Document 146 Filed 09/24/26 Page 1 of 3

2
E.A. Renfroe & Co., Inc. v. Moran, 338 F. App’x 836, 838-39 (11th Cir.
2009) (“Courts of equity have long observed the general rule that a court
may not enter an injunction against a person who has not been made a
party to the case before it.”); see also Jackson v. Baisden, No. 21-13004,
2022 WL 610314, at *1 (11th Cir. 2022) (holding the district court lacked
subject matter jurisdiction to grant an injunction against a non-party).
Second, Plaintiff’s motion is based on events that are not closely
related to the matters set forth in his complaint. 	The purpose of
preliminary injunctive relief is to “preserve the status quo” between the
parties and prevent irreparable injury until the merits of the underlying
lawsuit can be resolved. All Care Nursing Serv. v. Bethesda Mem’l Hosp.,
887 F.2d 1535, 1537 (11th Cir. 1989). This means that “the relief sought
in the motion must be closely related to the conduct complained of in the
actual complaint.” 	Garrison v. Nuzum, 2024 WL 5273268, at *1 (M.D.
Fla. June 27, 2024) (cleaned up and collecting cases).
Here, the allegations in Plaintiff’s motion reference a lost or stolen
hearing aid, legal mail delivery, confinement, and an alleged battery.
(Doc. 142 at 2). 	Further, in his motion, Plaintiff complains of conduct
that occurred from August 2025 to August 2026. 	(Id.). 	In contrast,
Case 3:25-cv-00202-MW-ZCB Document 146 Filed 09/24/26 Page 2 of 3

3
Plaintiff’s complaint involves an excessive force claim and failure-to-
intervene claim that occurred in April of 2024. (Doc. 33 at 5-6). 	Because
Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction is not based on matters set
forth in his complaint, it lacks merit. 	See Daker v. Ward, 2023 WL
3205329, at *4 (M.D. Ga. May 2, 2023) (“The relief Plaintiff seeks is . . .
not of the same character and does not deal with conduct closely related
to the conduct complained of in Plaintiff’s Recast Complaint. 	Plaintiff’s
requested preliminary injunctive relief is therefore improper.”).
Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s
request for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 142) be DENIED.
At Pensacola, Florida this 24th day of September 2026.
/s/ Zachary C. Bolitho
Zachary C. Bolitho
United States Magistrate Judge
Notice to the Parties
Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must
be 	filed 	within 	fourteen 	days 	of 	the 	date 	of 	the 	Report 	and
Recommendation. 	Any 	different 	deadline 	that 	may 	appear 	on 	the
electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only and does not control.
An objecting party must serve a copy of the objections on all other parties.
A 	party 	who 	fails 	to 	object 	to 	the 	magistrate 	judge’s 	findings 	or
recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the
right 	to 	challenge 	on 	appeal 	the 	district 	court’s 	order 	based 	on
unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. 	See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28
U.S.C. § 636.
Case 3:25-cv-00202-MW-ZCB Document 146 Filed 09/24/26 Page 3 of 3