(PC) Williams v. Price et al, No. 1:2018cv00102 - Document 33 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 32 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL and DISMISSING Certain Claims signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/8/2018. (Jessen, A)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 COREY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, 12 13 Case No. 1:18-cv-00102-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. (ECF No. 32) 14 BRANDON PRICE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Corey Williams, a civil detainee, is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this 18 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 28, 2018, Plaintiff filed a second 19 amended complaint which was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 20 § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On September 28, 2018, the magistrate judge filed a findings and recommendations. The 22 findings and recommendations recommended dismissing certain claims without leave to amend. 23 The findings and recommendations was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any 24 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days from the 25 date of service. The period for filing objections has passed and no objections have been filed. 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 27 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 28 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1 2 1. FULL; 3 4 The findings and recommendations, filed September 28, 2018, is ADOPTED IN 2. This action shall proceed against Defendants Ahlin and Price in their official 5 capacity for substantive due process violations of the Fourteenth Amendment based 6 on the allegations that the amendment to section 4350 of Title 9 of the California 7 Code of Regulations is punitive in nature and the regulation is overly broad as it 8 prohibits devices not capable of connecting to the internet or having memory 9 storage capability; and on the procedural due process claim against Defendant Price for implementing a policy more restrictive than section 4350; 10 11 3. All other claims are dismissed without leave to amend for failure to state a claim; 12 4. The individual capacity claims against Defendants Ahlin and Price are dismissed without leave to amend; and 13 14 5. This action is referred back to the magistrate judge for initiation of service of process. 15 16 17 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ November 8, 2018 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2