Timothy D. Wilkins v. Daniel Smith, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed Timothy D. Wilkins's second amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against a prison physician and a Doe correctional officer. The court held that the allegations failed to state an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim and dismissed the federal claims without leave to amend. The court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims and directed the Clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. The second amended complaint failed to state an Eighth Amendment claim against Smith because it alleged, at most, a difference of opinion regarding medical treatment and did not plausibly allege that Smith knew of and disregarded a substantial risk of serious harm. The claim was dismissed without leave to amend.
2. The second amended complaint failed to state an Eighth Amendment claim against the Doe defendant because the allegation that the defendant falsified or prevented blood-count testing was speculative and conclusory, and the complaint did not plausibly allege that the defendant knew of and disregarded a substantial risk of serious harm. The claim was dismissed without leave to amend.
3. After dismissing all claims within its original jurisdiction, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the second amended complaint stated an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim against Smith based on his alleged refusal to order diagnostic procedures, summon a specialist, and provide treatment other than medication.
2. Whether the second amended complaint stated an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim against the Doe correctional officer based on the alleged cancellation or falsification of blood-count testing.
3. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining California-law claims after dismissing all federal claims.

Disposition

dismissed