Summary
stating that the application of prisoner court access principles to civilly committed mental patients is appropriate and noting that the plaintiff did not have a claim for court access violations, because he did not show that an inability to access a lawyer or legal materials prevented him from filing a claim
Summary of this case from Valdez v. RoybalOpinion
04-CV-1489 (JMR/FLN).
April 15, 2008
ORDER
Plaintiff objects to the Report and Recommendation issued February 20, 2008, by the Honorable Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate recommended granting in part and denying in part defendants' motion to dismiss. Plaintiff's objections to the Report were timely filed pursuant to Local Rule 72.2(b).
Based on a de novo review of the record herein, the Court adopts the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation [Docket No. 48]. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss [Docket No. 35] is granted in part and denied in part as follows:
1. To the extent plaintiff alleges a violation of his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment against defendants Deborah Konieska and Mike Smith, the motion is denied.
2. The motion is granted in all other respects.