LINDSEY v. SUPERINTENDENT
CLOSED DISMISSED - This action is identical to another action proceeding in this Court. Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice as duplicative. No final judgment shall issue because no claim has been adjudicated. The clerk is directed to close this action on the docket. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/15/2017. (Copy mailed to Petitioner) (MEJ)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
MARC A. LINDSEY,
Order Dismissing Action as Duplicative
The petitioner filed the instant habeas petition, which resulted in the opening of a new civil
action on the docket. His habeas petition is essentially identical to another habeas petition received
by the Court from the petitioner approximately a week ago and is proceeding in No. 1:17-cv03083-TWP-TAB.
“A district court has an ample degree of discretion in deferring to another federal
proceeding involving the same parties and issues to avoid duplicative litigation.” Trippe Mfg. Co.
v. Am. Power Conversion Corp., 46 F.3d 624, 629 (7th Cir. 1995); see Rizzo v. City of Wheaton,
Ill., 462 Fed. Appx. 609, 613 (7th Cir. 2011) (“District courts have ample discretion to dismiss
duplicative litigation. . . .”). This action is identical to another action proceeding in this Court.
Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice as duplicative.
No final judgment shall issue because no claim has been adjudicated. The clerk is directed
to close this action on the docket.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
MARC A. LINDSEY
PLAINFIELD - CF
PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
727 MOON ROAD
PLAINFIELD, IN 46168
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?