What is the test for establishing a cognizable cognizable claim against White?

Turning to plaintiff's due process claim, plaintiff has stated, for screening purposes, a cognizable claim against White. Due process requires, inter alia, an informal, non-adversarial hearing regarding a prisoner's placement in administrative segregation. See Toussaint v. McCarthy, 801 F.2d 1080, 1091-92 (9th Cir. 1986). Plaintiff alleges he received neither hearing nor notice of why he was being placed in administrative segregation.

Next, the court finds that plaintiff has stated, for screening purposes, a cognizable "class of one" equal protection claim against White. A plaintiff establishes a "class of one" equal protection claim where he alleges that he has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment. See Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 564 (2000).

Page 4