Cavalier v. Newsom

Opinion

ROBERT THOMAS CAVALIER, Case No.: 20-cv-01398-MMA-KSC CDCR #E-98747, ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL Plaintiff, ACTION PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § v. 1915A(b)(1);

GAVIN NEWSOM; JOHN DOE, Director DENYING MOTIONS TO PROCEED of BPH Operations; RANDY GROUNDS; IN FORMA PAUPERIS AS MOOT [Doc. No. 2] Defendants. Plaintiff Robert Thomas Cavalier, currently housed at the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility located in San Diego, California, and proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Compl. at 1, Doc. No. 1. In addition, Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Doc. No. 2. I. Sua Sponte Screening Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, obligates the Court to review complaints filed by anyone “incarcerated or detained in any facility who is accused of, sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms or conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or diversionary program,” “as soon as practicable after docketing” and regardless of whether the prisoner prepays filing fees or moves to proceed IFP. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), (c). Pursuant to this provision of the PLRA, the Court is required to review prisoner complaints which “seek[] redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a government entity,” and to dismiss those, or any portion of those, which are “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or which “seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1)-(2); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 446-47 (9th Cir. 2000); Hamilton v. Brown, 630 F.3d 889, 892 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011). “The purpose of § 1915A is ‘to ensure that the targets of frivolous or malicious suits need not bear the expense of responding.’” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 920 n.1 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Wheeler v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc., 689 F.3d 680, 681 (7th Cir. 2012)). Plaintiff’s Complaint is subject to sua sponte dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) because it is duplicative of another civil action he has pending in this Court. See Cavalier v. Pollard, et al., S.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 3:20-cv-01379-DMS- AHG (Compl., ECF Doc. No. 1). A court “‘may take notice of proceedings in other courts, both within and without the federal judicial system, if those proceedings have a direct relation to matters at issue.’” Bias v. Moynihan, 508 F.3d 1212, 1225 (9th Cir. 2007) (quoting Bennett v. Medtronic, Inc., 285 F.3d 801, 803 n.2 (9th Cir. 2002)). Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint contains the same factual allegations and names the same defendants that are found in Case No. Civil Case No. 3:20-cv-01379-DMS- A prisoner’s complaint is considered frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) if it “merely repeats pending or previously litigated claims.” Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1105 n.2 (9th Cir. 1995) (construing former 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)) (citations and internal quotations omitted). Because Plaintiff has already brought the same claims presented in the instant action against the same defendants in Cavalier v. Pollard, et al., S.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 3:20-cv-01379-DMS-AHG, the Court must dismiss this duplicative and subsequently filed civil case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). See Cato, 70 F.3d at 1105 n.2; Resnick, 213 F.3d at 446 n.1; see also Adams v. Cal. Dep’t of Health Servs., 487 F.3d 684, 688-89 (9th Cir. 2007). II. Conclusion and Order Good cause appearing, the Court DISMISSES this civil action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) without prejudice to Plaintiff's pursuit of the same claims against the same parties which are currently pending in Cavalier v. Pollard, et al., S.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 3:20-cv-01379-DMS-AHG. The Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly and terminate this action. DATE: July 24, 2020 phisa eal) La / i ler HONORABLE MICHAEL M. ANELLO United States District Judge