(PC)Saiz

(PC)Saiz v. Putnam

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 1, 20211:20-cv-01231California1,413 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

22 Plaintiff filed suit on August 31, 2020 against “Senior Dep. Mrs. Putnam” and “Senior 23 Dep. Ms. Schrieber.” (ECF No. 1, p. 1). Plaintiff brought claims concerning failure to protect, 24 denial of due process, and retaliation. (ECF Nos. 1, 6). Generally, these claims stemmed from

26 1 Plaintiff alleges the underlying actions occurred in Kings County Jail, which is where many pretrial detainees are held. However, Plaintiff provides both an inmate number at Kings County Jail and a CDCR inmate number, 27 indicating that Plaintiff is an inmate being held at Kings County Jail. The Court presumes that Plaintiff has been convicted. Regardless, the distinction as to whether Plaintiff has been convicted or is a pretrial detainee is not material here. Plaintiff’s allegations that Defendants refused his requests to be placed in protective custody general population, as opposed to being placed in a cell with a violent inmate, and then retaliated against him by placing him in administrative segregation. In screening the complaint, the Court concluded that Plaintiff stated “cognizable claims against Defendants Putnam and Schrieber for (1)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.