Warner v. Friedman et al
ORDER DISMISSING CASE AS DUPLICATIVE. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 1/11/17. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/11/2017)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 16-cv-04345-YGR (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
RABBI Y. FRIEDMAN, et al.,
Plaintiff filed the instant pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in which he seeks
enforcement of a settlement agreement reached in his earlier case, Case No. C 11-5039 YGR (PR)
United States District Court
Northern District of California
(N.D. Cal. filed October 13, 2011). He also seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28
U.S.C. § 1915, which will be resolved in a separate written Order.
Plaintiff should not have filed a duplicative complaint in a new action, but, instead, he
should have sought enforcement of the settlement agreement in his earlier case. The Court may
dismiss as frivolous a complaint that merely repeats pending or previously litigated claims. 28
U.S.C. § 1915A. See Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1105 n.2 (9th Cir. 1995); Bailey v.
Johnson, 846 F.2d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 1988). Accordingly, the instant action is DISMISSED as
duplicative. If Plaintiff wishes to pursue a motion to enforce the settlement agreement in Case No.
C 11-5039 YGR (PR), he may file such a motion in his earlier action. Plaintiff must clearly
indicate the case number of that action— Case No. C 11-5039 YGR (PR)—and he must entitle it:
“Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement.”
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s instant action is DISMISSED as duplicative. 28
U.S.C. § 1915A (b)(1). The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment, terminate all pending
motions as moot, and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 11, 2017
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?