Gipson
(PC) Michel v. Gipson
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FABIAN HANCY MICHEL, No. 2:21-cv-2178 WBS KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CONNIE GIPSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On October 24, 2022, the undersigned recommended that this action be dismissed without 21 leave to amend because he failed to identify a cognizable due process violation in connection with 22 the December 6, 2020 rules violation report. (ECF No. 25 at 6.) On November 7, 2022, another 23 inmate prepared objections for plaintiff, which are signed by plaintiff, stating that because 24 plaintiff is receiving mental health care services at the EOP1 level of care and has been identified 25
1 The Mental Health Services Delivery System Program Guide for the California Department of 26 Corrections and…