(PC) Bland v. Clark, No. 1:2020cv01624 - Document 20 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 17 Findings and Recommendations and Dismissing Action signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/21/2021. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSHUA DAVIS BLAND, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 v. KEN CLARK, No. 1:20-cv-01624-NONE-SKO (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION (Doc. No. 17) Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Joshua Davis Bland is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 this civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 2, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge found that the court lacks subject- 21 matter jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claims, and that plaintiff’s claim for emotional injuries is 22 barred by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). (Doc. No. 12.) Therefore, the magistrate 23 judge ordered plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed. (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff 24 filed a response to the order to show cause on October 15, 2021. (Doc. No. 15.) 25 On October 18, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 26 recommendations, recommending that this action be dismissed. (Doc. No. 17.) Therein, the 27 magistrate judge found that plaintiff’s response to the order to show cause does not meaningfully 28 call into question the court’s lack of jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claims or that his claim for 1 emotions injuries is barred by the PLRA. (Id. at 2.) The findings and recommendations were 2 served on plaintiff and provided him 14 days to file objections thereto. (Id. at 4.) Plaintiff has 3 not filed any objections, and the time to do so has passed. 4 Accordingly, 5 1. 6 7 adopted in full; 2. 3. 10 11 12 13 This action is dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and because plaintiff’s claim for emotional injuries is barred by the PLRA; and, 8 9 The findings and recommendations issued on October 18, 2021 (Doc. No. 17) are The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case for purposes of closure and to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 21, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.