McComas

(PC) Drake v. McComas

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 25, 20231:22-cv-01149California638 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAM DRAKE, Case No. 1:22-cv-01149-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO

CONDUCT LIMITED DISCOVERY AS

v.

PREMATURE

MCCOMAS, et al., (ECF No. 20) Defendants. 11 Plaintiff Sam Drake (“Plaintiff”) is a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against: (1) Defendants Mims and McComas for implementing a facially unconstitutional policy, FCJ Policy #E-120 and #E-410, in violation of the First Amendment; (2) Defendants Enriquez, Keoniyim, and Nichols for unconstitutional application of FCJ Policy #E-120 and #E-410 to Plaintiff, in violation of the First Amendment; and (3) Defendants Enriquez, Keoniyim, and Nichols for returning Plaintiff’s mail without notice, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. On April 25, 2023, the Court found service of the first amended complaint appropriate and 21…

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.