With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Second Am. Compl. ¶¶ 13-18. Temporarily re- moving a prisoner from his cell to maintain order and security is an acceptable non-punitive purpose. Bell, 441 U.S. at 546-47, 99 S.Ct. 1861 (“Maintaining institutional security and preserving internal order and discipline are essential goals that may require limitation or retraction of the retained constitutional rights of both convicted prisoners and pretrial detainees.”). Nor has Senalan set forth any legal conclusions — let alone facts — that would suggest that the temporary confinement was excessive in light of this purpose. And Senalan makes no allegations that the second cell posed any risk to him. In fact, Senalan has not alleged that being confined in the booking cell even posed any risk to his safety. Cf Zarnes, 64 F.3d at 290 (<HOLDING>). Senalan only alleges that he was removed from

A: holding that the inmate had no cognizable due process claim because he had no liberty interest in being free from disciplinary segregation
B: holding that a detention officers alleged negligent conduct of failing to medically screen an inmate who later committed suicide in a holding cell  in violation of the police departments policies  was not the proximate cause of the inmates death when there was no evidence that the inmate would have been unable to kill himself if he had been medically screened and any claim that the inmate would have presented as suicidal in such screening was purely speculative
C: holding that the due process clause permits the state to treat a prison inmate who has a serious mental illness with antipsychotic drugs against his will if the inmate is dangerous to himself or others and the treatment is in the inmates medical interest
D: holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate
D.