(PC) Trammel v. Ramos ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEMARION TRAMMEL, No. 2:23-cv-1183 DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 A. RAMOS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff’s complaint was filed in the 18 Northern District of California on June 20, 2023 and transferred to this court on June 23, 2023. 19 The court’s own records reveal that on June 9, 2023, plaintiff filed a complaint containing 20 virtually identical allegations against the same defendants. See Trammel v. Ramos, 2:23-cv-1111 21 AC P.1 Due to the duplicative nature of the present action, this court will recommend that the 22 complaint be dismissed. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign 24 a district judge to this case; and 25 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. 26 P. 41(b). 27 1 A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 28 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980). 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned to this 2 || case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty days after being served 3 | with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. 4 | The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 5 | Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 6 | may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 7 | Cir. 1991). 8 | Dated: June 29, 2023 9 10 ll ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 | pLB:9 DB prisoner inbox/civil rights/R/traml 183.23 23 24 25 26 27 28