Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00011/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00011-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MALCOLM YISRAEL WRIGHT,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

SMITH, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:10-cv-00011-AWI-GSA-PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. 39.)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS

(Doc. 30.)

ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED 

ON (1) PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM FOR DENIAL 

OF ACCESS TO RELIGIOUS PRAYER ITEMS 

IN VIOLATION OF THE FREE EXERCISE 

CLAUSE, AGAINST DEFENDANTS SMITH, 

GONZALES, AND MILLER; AND (2) 

PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM FOR INTERFERENCE 

WITH INCOMING MAIL BEGINNING ON 

DECEMBER 24, 2007, IN VIOLATION OF 

THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AGAINST 

DEFENDANTS SMITH AND GONZALES

ORDER DISMISSING ALL REMAINING 

CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

ORDER FOR DEFENDANTS TO FILE 

ANSWER WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

I. BACKGROUND

Malcolm Yisrael Wright (APlaintiff@) is an inmate currently in North Carolina state 

custody at the Central Prison Mental Health Facility in Raleigh, North Carolina. Plaintiff is 

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six 

Case 1:10-cv-00011-AWI-GSA Document 41 Filed 09/25/13 Page 1 of 4
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), based on allegations of events occurring at the United 

States Penitentiary (USP)-Atwater when Plaintiff was incarcerated there. 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 July 18, 2013, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss, filed on December 11, 2012, be granted in part and denied in 

part, and that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s claim for denial of access to religious prayer 

items in violation of the Free Exercise Clause against defendants Smith, Gonzales, and Miller; 

and Plaintiff’s claim for interference with incoming mail in violation of the First Amendment 

against defendants Smith and Gonzales. (Doc. 39.) The parties were granted thirty days in 

which to file objections to the findings and recommendations. On August 15, 2013, 

Defendants filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (Doc. 40.) To date, Plaintiff 

has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations, opposition to Defendants’ 

objections, or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations. 

II. DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTIONS

In their objections, Defendants argue that only one of Plaintiff’s claims for interference 

with incoming mail has been exhausted. Defendants assert that it is undisputed that Plaintiff 

exhausted only one grievance – claim number 486531-F1 – which only put the Bureau of 

Prisons on notice of a claim for interference with mail while Plaintiff was on a hunger strike 

starting in January 2008, and that the exhausted grievance did not concern any interference 

with Plaintiff’s mail while he was in administrative segregation until December 2007. 

Therefore, Defendants argue that Plaintiff’s claim for interference with his mail in this lawsuit 

should be limited to only the time period while he was on the hunger strike. 

Discussion

The Magistrate Judge recommended that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s claims for (1) 

interference with incoming mail, and (2) denial of access to religious prayer items. Based on 

Plaintiff’s exhausted grievance number 486531-F1, Defendants seek to limit Plaintiff’s claim 

for interference with mail to the time period when Plaintiff was on a hunger strike, beginning in 

Case 1:10-cv-00011-AWI-GSA Document 41 Filed 09/25/13 Page 2 of 4
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

January 2008. However, Plaintiff clearly states in grievance number 486531-F1, “All of my 

personal property was taken from me on December 24, 2007, a week before I went on hunger 

strike.” (Doc. 30-3 at 13) (emphasis in original). Plaintiff complains that among other 

property, his address book and stamps were taken, asserting that he “notified staff at the time 

that I needed my personal property, [including] my address book and stamps so that I can 

communicate with family and friends.” Id. Plaintiff complains that “my right to send and 

receive mail has been and is being violated by withholding my address book and stamps, and 

not allowing me to purchase stamps.” Id. Based on these excerpts from Plaintiff’s grievance, 

the court cannot find that Plaintiff’s interference-with-mail claim should be limited to the time 

period when he was on hunger strike. However, good cause exists to limit the claim to the time 

period beginning on December 24, 2007.

III. CONCLUSION

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 

including Defendants’ objections, the Court adopts the findings and recommendations as 

follows.

Based on the foregoing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on July 18, 

2013, are ADOPTED as follows;

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, filed on December 11, 2012, is GRANTED IN 

PART and DENIED IN PART;

3. Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust remedies is GRANTED as 

to Plaintiff’s claims for denial of religious meals, denial of access to a rabbi, 

lack of Jewish materials in the chapel, and interference with mail before 

December 24, 2007; and DENIED as to Plaintiff’s claims for (1) denial of 

access to religious prayer items, and (2) interference with incoming mail

beginning on December 24, 2007;

Case 1:10-cv-00011-AWI-GSA Document 41 Filed 09/25/13 Page 3 of 4
4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4. This action now proceeds on the First Amended Complaint with (1) Plaintiff’s 

claim for denial of access to religious prayer items in violation of the Free 

Exercise Clause, against defendants Smith, Gonzales, and Miller; and (2) 

Plaintiff’s claim for interference with incoming mail beginning on December 24, 

2007, in violation of the First Amendment, against defendants Smith and 

Gonzales;

5. All remaining claims and defendants are dismissed from this action; 

6. Plaintiff’s claims for denial of religious meals, denial of access to a rabbi, lack 

of Jewish materials in the chapel, and interference with incoming mail before 

December 24, 2007 are DISMISSED from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure 

to exhaust administrative remedies; and

7. Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, Defendants shall file an 

Answer to the complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 25, 2013 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

0m8i788

Case 1:10-cv-00011-AWI-GSA Document 41 Filed 09/25/13 Page 4 of 4