Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01500/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01500-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\WQH\11cv1500-Dismiss Duplicative.wpd.18Aug11 -1- 11cv1500 WQH (MDD)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID HERRERA ROMAN,

BOP #24116298,

Civil No. 11-1500 WQH (MDD)

Plaintiff,

ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL

ACTION AS DUPLICATIVE

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(b)(1)

 vs.

GERBATSH, M.D., 

Defendant.

Plaintiff, an inmate currently incarcerated at the Western Regional Detention Center

located in San Diego, California and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights Complaint

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. In addition, Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Proceed in forma

pauperis (“IFP”).

I. Sua Sponte Screening Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, obligates the Court to

review complaints filed by anyone “incarcerated or detained in any facility who is accused of,

sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms or conditions

of parole, probation, pretrial release, or diversionary program,” “as soon as practicable after

Case 3:11-cv-01500-WQH-MDD Document 5 Filed 08/18/11 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\WQH\11cv1500-Dismiss Duplicative.wpd.18Aug11 -2- 11cv1500 WQH (MDD)

docketing” and regardless of whether the prisoner prepays filing fees or moves to proceed IFP.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), (c). The Court must sua sponte dismiss prisoner complaints, or any

portions thereof, which are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 446-47 (9th Cir. 2000).

 Plaintiff’s instant Complaint is subject to sua sponte dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(b)(1) because it appears to be duplicative of a case Plaintiff is already litigating.

Plaintiff’s Complaint contains identical claims that are found in Roman v. Gerbatsh, S.D. Cal.

Civil Case No. 11cv1442 H (BLM). A court “may take notice of proceedings in other courts,

both within and without the federal judicial system, if those proceedings have a direct relation

to matters at issue.” United States ex rel. Robinson Rancheria Citizens Council v. Borneo, Inc.,

971 F.2d 244, 248 (9th Cir. 1992). 

A prisoner’s complaint is considered frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) if it

“merely repeats pending or previously litigated claims.” Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103,

1105 n.2 (9th Cir. 1995) (construing former 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)) (citations and internal

quotations omitted). Because Plaintiff is already litigating the same claims presented in the

instant action in Roman v. Gerbatsh, S.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 11cv1442 H (BLM), the Court

hereby DISMISSES Civil Case No. 11cv1500 WQH (MDD) pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(b)(1). See Cato, 70 F.3d at 1105 n.2; Resnick, 213 F.3d at 446 n.1.

II. Conclusion and Order

 Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

Plaintiff’s Complaint in Civil Case No. 11cv1500 WQH (MDD) is DISMISSED as

frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). 

The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 18, 2011

WILLIAM Q. HAYES

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-01500-WQH-MDD Document 5 Filed 08/18/11 Page 2 of 2