(PC) Goods v. Wasco CA State Prison

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 CHARLES FRANCIS GOODS, Case No. 1:19-cv-01318-JLT (PC)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND DIRECTING CLERK OF 13 v. COURT TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE; AND

14 WASCO STATE PRISON, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO 15 Defendant. DISMISS CASE AS DUPLICATIVE

17 18 Previously, the Court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) and 19 determined that the allegations contained therein are duplicative of allegations included in a 20 previously-filed action, Goods v. Wasco State Prison, Case No. 1:19-cv-0661-AWI-SAB. (Doc. 21 8.) Plaintiff was therefore ordered to show cause why this action should not be dismissed as 22 duplicative of the earlier-filed case. The period for responding to the Court’s Order to Show Cause 23 has now passed, and plaintiff has not responded. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that: 24 1. The Order to Show Cause is vacated; 25 2. The Clerk of Court shall assign a District Judge to this case; and 26 The Court RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed as a duplicate of Goods v. Wasco 27 State Prison, Case No. 1:19-cv-0661-AWI-SAB. 28 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 1 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 2 after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file written 3 objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 4 Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 5 specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 6 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8

9 Dated: February 3, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28