Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing for failure to state valid cause of action plaintiff’s section 1983 action alleging that she was deprived of protected liberty interest without due process when defendants-DCFS officials issued protection plan that essentially closed plaintiff’s day-care (during investigation of complaint that plaintiff had failed to supervise children for period of time) without providing plaintiff with hearing prior to establishing terms of plan. Due process does not require said hearing where plaintiff’s participation in protection plan was voluntary, and where plaintiff could opt out of plan at any time. Moreover, plaintiff was not entitled to subsequent hearing once plan was implemented where plaintiff had voluntarily agreed to stop operating day-care. Fact that ALJ ultimately expunged any DCFE “indicated finding” against plaintiff, or that defendants took 60 days beyond established limit to complete its investigation of complaint did not require different result.