Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03375/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03375-0/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH EVERETT JOHNSON, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPUTY HENSEL; et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 05-3375 SI (pr)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Joseph Everett Johnson, Jr., an inmate at the San Mateo County Jail, has filed a pro se

civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. His complaint is now before the court for review

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A, which requires the court to engage in a preliminary screening of

any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of

a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any

cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim

upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from

such relief. See id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See

Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

The complaint filed in this action duplicates the complaint filed several months earlier

by Johnson in Johnson v. Hensel, No. C 05-2258 SI. The complaint is frivolous because it

repeats claims made in the earlier case. See Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1105 n.2 (9th

Cir. 1995); Bailey v. Johnson, 846 F.2d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 1988) (duplicative or repetitious

Case 3:05-cv-03375-SI Document 6 Filed 03/02/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

litigation of virtually identical causes of action is subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915

as malicious). This action is dismissed with prejudice. The clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 1, 2006 _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03375-SI Document 6 Filed 03/02/06 Page 2 of 2