Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01001/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01001-5/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALDINE DARDEN,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

S. DRISCOLL, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:12-cv-01001 LJO GSA PC

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

THAT DEFENDANTS SPENCER AND 

BLACKFORD BE DISMISSED FROM THIS 

ACTION 

OBJECTIONS DUE IN TWENTY DAYS

I. Screening Requirement 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

By order filed April 9, 2015, the Court issued an order finding that the first amended 

complaint stated a claim against Defendant Driscoll for deliberate indifference to her serious 

medical needs, but failed to state a claim against Defendants Blackford and Spencer. Plaintiff 

was provided an opportunity to either file a second amended complaint or notify the Court of 

her willingness to proceed on the claims found by the Court to be cognizable. On May 13, 

2015, Plaintiff filed a notice, indicating that she intends to proceed against Dr. Driscoll and that 

she “agrees to remove Todd Spencer, M.D. and Donald Blackford, M.D. from this complaint.”

Case 1:12-cv-01001-EPG Document 26 Filed 05/18/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Defendants Todd Spencer and 

Donald Blackford be dismissed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Within twenty 

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections 

within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 

772 F.3d 834 (9th Cir. 2014)(citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1394(9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 16, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01001-EPG Document 26 Filed 05/18/15 Page 2 of 2