CDCR
(PC) Garland v. CDCR
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SHAUN DARNELL GARLAND, No. 2:23-cv-0418 DAD SCR P Plaintiff, v. ORDER CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, et al., Defendants. 17 Plaintiff Shaun Darnell Garland, a state prisoner, proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. This matter is referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff’s first amended complaint (“FAC”) is before the court for screening.1 (ECF No. 16.) For screening purposes, the FAC states a First Amendment Free Exercise claim for damages against Dr. Chaudry and a RLUIPA claim for injunctive relief against CDCR; no other claims are stated. Plaintiff may proceed on the two claims stated or may file a further amended complaint under the guidelines set forth below.
26 On October 3, 2024, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff be ordered to pay the filing fee in order to proceed with this action since plaintiff accrued…