Opinion
1:22-cv-01165-ADA-EPG (PC)
10-25-2023
SAM DRAKE, Plaintiff, v. STEPHANIE CLENDIN, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING SCREENING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(ECF Nos. 11, 13)
Plaintiff Sam Drake is a detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
It is not clear if Plaintiff was a civil detainee or a pretrial detainee at the time he filed this case, and his status may have changed throughout the relevant period.
On July 13, 2023, the assigned Magistrate Judge entered screening findings and recommendations, recommending that “[t]his case proceed on Plaintiff's claims against defendants Clendenin and Kishan that they subjected Plaintiff to punishment in violation of the Due Process Clause (claim 1 and claim 2); Plaintiff's claim against defendant Clendenin that she failed to provide Plaintiff with restorative mental health treatment in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment (claim 3); and Plaintiff's claim against defendants Clendenin and Kishan that California Welfare and Institutions Code Section 7301 is an unconstitutional bill of attainder (claim 4).” (ECF No. 13, at 21). The assigned Magistrate Judge also recommended that “[a]ll other claims be dismissed for failure to state a claim.” (Id.) The findings and recommendations contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one days after service. (Id.) On July 21, 2023, Plaintiff timely filed a “statement of non objection.” (ECF No. 14.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations issued on July 13, 2023, (ECF No. 13), are ADOPTED in FULL;
2. This case proceed on Plaintiff's claims against defendants Clendenin and Kishan that they subjected Plaintiff to punishment in violation of the Due Process Clause (claim 1 and claim 2); Plaintiff's claim against defendant Clendenin that she failed to provide Plaintiff with restorative mental health treatment in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment (claim 3); and Plaintiff's claim against defendants Clendenin and Kishan that California Welfare and Institutions Code Section 7301 is an unconstitutional bill of attainder (claim 4);
3. All other claims are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim; and
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to add Defendant S. Kishan to the Court's docket.
IT IS SO ORDERED.