(PC) Morgan v. Davies

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 Mike Morgan, No. 2:24-cv-01039 KJM CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 Davies, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On April 15, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 21 served on plaintiff, and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections to the findings 23 and recommendations. However, these objections do not address the magistrate judge’s 24 recommendation that this case be dismissed as duplicative of plaintiff’s complaint in a separate 25 action filed in this district. Compare Compl., ECF No. 1, with First Am. Compl., 26 No. 2:23-cv-01955 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 20, 2024), ECF No. 14. 27 ///// 28 ///// ] In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 2 || court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the 3 || findings and recommendations to be supported by the record. 4 See also Adams v. Cal. Dep’t of Health Servs., 487 F.3d 684, 688-89 (9th Cir. 2007) 5 || (plaintiffs generally have no right to maintain two separate actions involving the same subject 6 || matter at the same time in the same court and against the same defendant), overruled on other 7 | grounds by Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880, 904 (2008); Higgins v. Medina, No. 07-00941, 8 | 2007 WL 4258362, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2007) (dismissing complaint as duplicative of 9 || complaint filed in separate action). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 10 1. The findings and recommendations, ECF No. 3, are adopted in full. 11 2. This action 1s dismissed without prejudice to plaintiffs pursuing his claim in Case 12 No. 2:23-cv-01955. Cf Latham v. California Dep’t of Corr. & Rehab., No. 22-842, 13 2022 WL 2134161, at *2 (S.D. Cal. June 14, 2022). 14 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 15 | DATED: August 23, 2024. 16 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28