Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01165/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01165-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAM DRAKE,

Plaintiff,

v.

STEPHANIE CLENDIN, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:22-cv-01165-ADA-EPG (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING SCREENING 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

(ECF Nos. 11, 13)

Plaintiff Sam Drake is a detainee1proceeding 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. 

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 

1

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.

Case 1:22-cv-01165-KES-EPG Document 15 Filed 10/25/23 Page 1 of 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

2

(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.

Dated: October 25, 2023 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-01165-KES-EPG Document 15 Filed 10/25/23 Page 2 of 2