Perez

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND4

A. Complaint Perez filed his form complaint on April 5, 2023, listing causes of action for “general negligence,” “theft,” and “mental distress,” naming the CDCR employees as defendants, along with Does 1 to 100. In the section of the form complaint addressing

3 Unspecified statutory references are to the Government Code. 4 “We derive our facts from those properly pleaded in the complaint and matters properly judicially noticed. [Citations.] We take as true properly pleaded material facts alleged in the pleadings, disregarding contentions, deductions, and conclusions of fact or law. [Citation.]” (County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (2023) 87 Cal.App.5th 347, 355, fn. 2.) 2 compliance with “a claims statute,” Perez indicated that he “has complied with applicable claims statutes.” In his prayer for relief, Perez checked the boxes for compensatory and punitive damages of $1 million. In support of his causes of action, Perez alleged that, on January 2, 2022, correctional officer R. Gomez, Jr., asked Perez and his cellmate to leave their cell so that it could be searched. Gomez took an electronic tablet that belonged to Perez and which was…