Tubach v. Brown

Filing 4

ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/8/2013 ORDERING the Clerk assign a district judge to this action; and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed. Assigned and Referred to Judge William B. Shubb; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

ISABEL TUBACH,
Plaintiff,

11
12

vs.

13

No. 2:13-cv-0198 CKD P

JERRY BROWN,
Defendant.

14

ORDER AND
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

15
/

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. Plaintiff’s complaint was

18

filed on February 1, 2013. The court’s records reveal that on November 19, 2012, plaintiff filed

19

a complaint in Case No. 2:12-cv-2830 KJN P containing essentially the same allegations against

20

defendant Brown as in the instant complaint. That action was dismissed as duplicative on

21

January 18, 2013.1 Because the present action is also duplicative, the court will recommend that

22

the complaint be dismissed. See Adams v. California Dept. of Health Services, 487 F.3d 684,

23
24
25
26

1

The court noted that plaintiff raised similar allegations against defendant Brown in Case
Nos. 1:12-cv-0649 MJS P, 1:12-cv-1369 DLB, and 1:12-cv-1373 GBC. Court records indicate that
plaintiff is a party to 153 cases in the Eastern District of California, numerous of which name Brown
as a defendant. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 802 F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986) (court may
take judicial notice of court records).
1

1

688 (9th Cir. 2007) (“District courts retain broad discretion to control their dockets and in the

2

exercise of that power they may impose sanctions including, where appropriate, default and

3

dismissal.”) (affirming dismissal of duplicative later-filed action) (citations and quotation marks

4

omitted).

5
6

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court assign a district
judge to this action.

7

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED THAT this action be dismissed.

8

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

9

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen

10

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

11

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

12

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

13

shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are

14

advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the

15

District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

16

Dated: February 8, 2013

17

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22

2
tuba0198.dup

23
24
25
26
2