(PC) Hickman v. Chisholm ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN DUANE HICKMAN, No. 2:19-cv-1828 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 MATT CHISHOLM, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a county prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. Review of this court’s docket reveals that the claims in the instant complaint are 19 identical to those in the earlier filed Hickman v. Chisholm, No. 2:19-cv-1254 TLN AC, which is 20 currently pending in this court. It will therefore be recommended that the instant action be 21 dismissed as duplicative. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly 23 assign a United States District Judge to this action. 24 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed as duplicative of 25 Hickman v. Chisholm, No. 2:19-cv-1254 TLN AC. 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 28 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 1 | with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 2 | and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 3 || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 4 | (9th Cir. 1991). 5 | DATED: September 16, 2019 ~ 6 Hhttrn— ALLISON CLAIRE 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28