(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-1725 KJM DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 MATT CHISHOLM, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a county inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. A 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 P 20 (“Hickman I”), which was recently dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 21 granted. The claims in the instant complaint are also identical to those in the subsequently filed 22 Hickman v. Chisholm, No. 2:19-cv-1828 KJM AC P (“Hickman III”), which was also recently 23 dismissed as duplicative of Hickman I. It will therefore be recommended that the instant action 24 be dismissed as duplicative of both Hickman I and Hickman III. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed as 26 duplicative of Hickman v. Chisholm, No. 2:19-cv-1254 TLN AC P, and of Hickman v. 27 Chisholm, No. 2:19-cv-1828 KJM AC P. 28 //// 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days 3 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 4 | with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 5 | and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 6 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 7 | (9th Cir. 1991). 8 | Dated: October 17, 2019 9 10 ll ‘BORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 DB ORDERS! ORDERS.PRISONER.CIVIL RIGHTS □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28