Plaintiff asserted a claim of breach of due procedure, nonetheless it rests on a single ground as his equal protection declare that the ordinance does not have any logical basis.
Plaintiff just isn’t asserting it was entitled that it was denied any procedural rights to which. Consequently, its due process claim falls having its equal protection claim. Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 U.S. 456, 470 n. 12, 101 S. Ct. 715, 66 L. Ed. 2d 659 (1981) (“From our summary under equal protection, nonetheless, it follows a fortiori that the ban on plastic milk that is nonreturnable will not break the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause: National Paint, 45 F.3d at 1129 refusing to take into account declare that ordinance violates substantive due procedure legal rights; financial legislation should be examined under equal security maxims”); see additionally Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 273, 114 S. Ct. 807, 127 L. Ed. 2d 114 (1994) (“Where a specific amendment `provides an explicit textual way to obtain constitutional protection’ against a certain kind of federal federal government behavior, ‘ that amendment, not the greater amount of general idea of substantive due procedure, ought to be the guide for analyzing these claims.'”)