Lopez-Rangel v. United States of America

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING Action as Duplicative of 1:14-cv-01175-DLB-PC, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 1/21/15: This complaint is DISMISSED as duplicative. This terminates this action in its entirety. (CASE CLOSED)(Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ISMAEL LOPEZ-RANGEL,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:14-cv-01980 DLB PC
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AS
DUPLICATIVE OF 1:14-cv-01175-DLB-PC

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

16
17

Plaintiff Ismael Lopez-Rangel, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

18

filed this civil action on December 8, 2014, pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, which

19

authorizes tort actions against the United States if the United States, as a private person, would be

20

liable to the plaintiff under California tort law. United States v. Olson, 546 U.S. 43, 44, 126 S.Ct.

21

510, 511 (2005); Delta Savings Bank v. United States, 265 F.3d 1017, 1025 (9th Cir. 2001).

22

In this action, Plaintiff complains of medical care he received with respect to an eye infection

23

he sustained while incarcerated at USP-Atwater. In a previously-filed ongoing action, Plaintiff

24

presents several claims concerning the same subject matter. See Lopez-Rangel v. Copenhaver, 1:14-

25

cv-01175-DLB-PC. In the instant action, Plaintiff names as federal actors: Warden Paul

26

Copenhaver, Health Services Administrator Mettry, Dr. Franco, Nurse Franco, Unit Manager

27

Gardea, Physician’s Assistant Dea Wong, Dr. Kenneth Grossman, and Dr. Joseph Grim. These are

28

the same individuals named as Defendants in the previously-filed action. While the causes of action
1

1
2
3
4
5
6

are not the same, the factual allegations in both actions are identical. Therefore, the Court concludes
that the instant action shall be dismissed as duplicative. To the extent Plaintiff wishes to present his
claims pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, he must do so by moving to amend in the
previously-filed action.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the instant complaint is DISMISSED as
duplicative. This terminates this action in its entirety.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

January 21, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2