John Lewis Rush v. G. Thompson, Correctional Officer; T. Stafford, Lieutenant/Grievance Officer; P. Thompson, Facility Manager; and D. Varner, Chief Grievance Officer

Rush v. Thompson · United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Erie Division · January 21, 2026 · No. 1:25-CV-00277-RAL

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denied John Lewis Rush’s motion for a preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order. The court held that the requested relief was unrelated to the claims in the complaint and that Rush had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits or immediate irreparable harm. The court stated that claims concerning the later incident would need to be brought in a separate action.

Holdings

  1. A plaintiff is not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief based on unrelated incidents and claims that are not tethered to the claims in the complaint.
  2. Rush was not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief because he failed to allege facts showing either a likelihood of success on the merits or immediate irreparable harm.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Rush was entitled to a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order based on incidents unrelated to the claims pleaded in his complaint.
  2. Whether Rush demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and immediate irreparable harm sufficient to obtain preliminary injunctive relief.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (20)

  • Alues v. Main, 747 Fed. Appx. 111, 112 n.3 (8d Cir.)(followed)
  • Holland v. Rosen, 895 F.3d 272, 285 (8d Cir.)(followed)
  • Council of Alternative Political Parties v. Hooks, 121 F.3d 876, 879 (8d Cir.)(followed)
  • Opticians Ass'n of America v. Independent Opticians of America, 920 F.2d 187, 191-92 (3d Cir.)(followed)
  • Acierno v. New Castle County, 40 F.3d 645, 653 (3d Cir.)(followed)
  • Adams v. Freedom Forge Corp., 204 F.3d 475, 484 (8d Cir.)(followed)
  • United States v. Stazola, 893 F.2d 34, 37 n.3 (8d Cir.)(followed)
  • Hohe v. Casey, 868 F.2d 69, 72 (3d Cir.)(followed)
  • ECRI v. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 809 F.2d 228, 226 (8d Cir.)(followed)
  • Wetzel v. Edwards, 635 F.2d 2838, 286 (4th Cir.)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 20.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…