Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-01813/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-01813-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CHARLES BLALOCK, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

J. CLARK KELSO, et al. 

Defendants. 

No. 2:17-cv-1813 TLN AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights 

action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed November 22, 2019, this case was 

referred to the court’s Post-Screening ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) Project and stayed 

for a period of 120 days. ECF No. 24. That order provided defendant the opportunity to request 

opting out of the ADR Project based on a good faith belief that a settlement conference would be 

a waste of resources. Id. at 2. Defendant now requests to opt out of the Post-Screening ADR 

Project and that the stay be lifted. ECF No. 26. Having reviewed the request, the court finds 

good cause to grant it. 

Additionally, on October 22, 2019, the court ordered service of the complaint on 

defendants through the Court’s E-Service pilot program. Service on behalf of defendant Gideon 

was not waived because he passed away on April 1, 2017, ECF No. 22, approximately five 

months before this action was initiated. Plaintiff therefore must make a decision. Plaintiff may, 

Case 2:17-cv-01813-TLN-AC Document 27 Filed 01/23/20 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2 

if he so chooses, file a notice voluntarily dismissing defendant Gideon only. If he does so, the 

case will continue to proceed against defendant Miranda. If plaintiff wants to continue to try and 

pursue his claims against Gideon, he will have to identify the representative of Gideon’s estate 

and file a motion to substitute the estate for defendant Gideon. A motion to substitute the proper 

party for defendant Gideon under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25 must be filed within ninety 

days and must provide information that will allow the United States Marshal to serve the 

proposed substitute party (i.e. name and address of representative). If the motion does not contain 

information necessary to carry out service on the proposed substitute party, it shall be denied. 

Plaintiff shall promptly seek such information through discovery, the California Public Records 

Act, Calif. Gov’t. Code § 6250, et seq., or other means available to plaintiff. If access to the 

required information is denied or unreasonably delayed, plaintiff may seek judicial intervention. 

In the event plaintiff fails to file a proper motion to substitute within ninety days, it will be 

recommended that defendant Gideon be dismissed from this action. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Defendant’s request to opt out of the Post-Screening ADR Project, ECF No. 26, is 

granted. 

2. The stay of this action, commencing November 22, 2019, ECF No. 24, is lifted. 

3. Within twenty-one days of the filing of this order, defendant Miranda shall file a 

response to the complaint. 

4. Within ninety days of the service of this order, plaintiff must file either (1) a notice 

that he is voluntarily dismissing defendant Gideon or (2) a motion to substitute a proper party for 

defendant Gideon that includes information necessary to serve the proposed substitute party. 

Failure to file such a motion will result in a recommendation that defendant Gideon be dismissed. 

DATED: January 22, 2020 

Case 2:17-cv-01813-TLN-AC Document 27 Filed 01/23/20 Page 2 of 2