Opinion
2:22-cv-01533-DAD-AC (PC)
06-17-2024
THOMAS BODNAR, Plaintiff, v. STEPHANIE CLENDENIN, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS
(DOC. NO. 18)
DALE A. DROZD, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Thomas Bodnar is a civilly committed individual proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On April 11, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's third amended complaint and found that plaintiff had stated cognizable Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendants for allegedly subjecting him to overly restrictive conditions of confinement and providing deficient mental health care treatment that substantially departs from acceptable professional standards. (Doc. No. 18.) The magistrate judge also found that plaintiff had stated a cognizable First Amendment free exercise claim against defendant Price for failing to reinstate Protestant church services even though other religious services have been reinstated. (Id.) However, the magistrate judge found that plaintiff failed to state a cognizable due process claim based on his allegations of unfairness in his past and future Sexually Violent Predator Act evaluations. (Id. at 5-7.)
The pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service. (Id. at 8.) To date, no objections have been filed, and the time in which to do so has passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly,
1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 11, 2024 (Doc. No. 18) are adopted in full;
2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claims brought against all defendants regarding overly restrictive conditions of confinement and inadequate mental health treatment, and plaintiff's First Amendment free exercise claim brought against defendant Price;
3. All other claims brought by plaintiff in this action are dismissed; and
4. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.