[T][U] St. Amand v. Gomez

MEMORANDUM* California state prisoner Ervin Charles St. Amand appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. He contends the district court erred when it dismissed his action for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 65. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand. A. Background On February 17, 1995, the district court filed St. Amand's motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) or preliminary injunction. On May 19, 1995, the magistrate Judge recommended that the motion be dismissed because St. Amand had failed to notice defendants as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 and the local rules.