(PC)Hooker

(PC)Hooker v. Clendenin

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 25, 20241:23-cv-00969California3,085 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4

5

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8 9 CAMERON HOOKER, No. 1:23-cv-00969-EPG (PC) 10 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN

DISTRICT JUDGE

v. 12

AND

STEPHANIE CLENDENIN, et al., 13 Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO 14

DISMISS THIS ACTION WITH PREJUDICE

15 FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

16 (ECF No. 8)

17 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN THIRTY

DAYS

18 Plaintiff Cameron Hooker appears to be a pre-adjudication civil detainee proceeding pro 19 se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff 20 challenges the California regulation that prohibits internet usage for certain detained individuals 21 on the ground that it violates his First Amendment rights. (ECF No. 8 at 3, 7). The Court 22 previously screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that it failed to state any cognizable claims, 23 and gave Plaintiff leave to amend. (ECF No. 7). Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC) 24 on September 5, 2023 (ECF No. 8), which…

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.