Garcia v. Tafelmeyer et al
Filing
7
ORDER - It is therefore ordered that the Clerk of the Court update Plaintiff's address pursuant to his filing at ECF No. 6: Joey Garcia, #93047, N.N.C.C., P.O. Box 7000, Carson City, Nevada 89702. It is further or dered that Judge Baldwin's R&R (ECF No. 3 ) is ADOPTED in accordance with this order. It is further ordered that Plaintiffs IFP application (ECF No. 1) is DENIED AS MOOT. It is further ordered that the Clerk FILE the complaint (E CF No. 1-1). It is further ordered that the complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is DISMISSED without prejudice but without leave to amend in this action. It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly and CLOSE this case. Signed by District Judge Anne R. Traum on 3/5/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - GA)
Case 3:25-cv-00051-ART-CLB
Document 7
Filed 03/05/25
Page 1 of 2
1
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
4
5
6
7
8
JOEY A. GARCIA,
vs.
Case No. 3:25-CV-00051-ART-CLB
Plaintiff,
ORDER ON REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF U.S.
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
(ECF No. 3.)
JEREMEY TAFELMEYER, et al.,
Defendants.
9
10
Plaintiff Joey Garcia brings this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1983 against
11
Defendants Deputy Jeremey Tafelmeyer and Deputy Levi Bell. Plaintiff filed a pro
12
se civil rights complaint (ECF No. 1-1) and application to proceed in forma
13
pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 1). Magistrate Judge Baldwin issued a Report and
14
Recommendation
15
application, but dismissal of Plaintiff’s complaint as duplicative of a complaint
16
already filed in another case before the court. (ECF No. 3.)
(“R&R”),
which
recommended
granting
Plaintiff’s
IFP
17
I.
Dismissal of Complaint as Duplicative
18
Judge Baldwin’s R&R screened Plaintiff’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. §
19
1915A. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, courts may dismiss duplicative complaints.
20
See Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1107 (9th Cir. 1995). Judge Baldwin
21
recommended dismissal because Plaintiff’s complaint in this action is identical
22
to the complaint in a previously filed action, Garcia v. Tafelmeyer, et al., 3:25-cv-
23
00038-MMD-CSD at ECF No. 1-1.
24
Plaintiff filed an objection to the R&R, stating that he does not object to
25
dismissal of this action but requesting that the Court not dismiss his other
26
action, Case No. 3:25-cv-00038. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff states that the law library
27
accidentally filed his complaint two times, when he intended only to file one case.
28
(ECF No. 6.)
1
Case 3:25-cv-00051-ART-CLB
1
2
Document 7
Filed 03/05/25
Page 2 of 2
The Court will therefore adopt Judge Baldwin’s R&R and dismiss this
action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A as duplicative.
3
II.
Plaintiff’s Updated Address
4
On February 10, 2025, the Court ordered Plaintiff to update his address,
5
as his mail had been returned as undeliverable. (ECF No. 5.) In his objection to
6
the R&R, Plaintiff also included an updated address indicating that he is at
7
N.N.C.C. (ECF No. 6 at 2.) The Court will order the Clerk to update Plaintiff’s
8
address in this action accordingly.
9
III.
10
It is therefore ordered that the Clerk of the Court update Plaintiff’s address
11
pursuant to his filing at ECF No. 6:
Joey Garcia
#93047
N.N.C.C.
P.O. Box 7000
Carson City, Nevada 89702
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Conclusion
It is further ordered that Judge Baldwin’s R&R (ECF No. 3) is ADOPTED in
accordance with this order.
It is further ordered that Plaintiff’s IFP application (ECF No. 1) is DENIED
AS MOOT.
19
It is further ordered that the Clerk FILE the complaint (ECF No. 1-1).
20
It is further ordered that the complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is DISMISSED
21
22
23
24
without prejudice but without leave to amend in this action.
It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court ENTER JUDGMENT
accordingly and CLOSE this case.
Dated this 5th day of March 2025.
25
26
27
28
ANNE R. TRAUM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?