Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04518/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04518-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Asian Sheriff Officer
Defendant
Gary E. Bolton
Plaintiff
Medical Department Martinez Hospital
Defendant

Document Text:

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 1

Citations are to the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pin cites are to the ECF-generated page

numbers at the tops of the documents.

15-cv-4518 LB

ORDER

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

San Francisco Division

GARY E. BOLTON, SR., 

Plaintiff,

v.

ASIAN SHERIFF OFFICER; MEDICAL

DEPARTMENT MARTINEZ HOSPITAL, 

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

No. 15-cv-4518 LB

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

[Re: ECF No. 1]

Gary E. Bolton, apparently a pretrial detainee currently held at Napa State Hospital (see ECF No.

3), filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and applied to proceed in forma

pauperis. Mr. Bolton has consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. (ECF No. 6.)1

 His

complaint is now before the court for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 

The court must dismiss a prisoner's complaint if it determines that the action "is frivolous [or]

malicious." 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). Section § 1915A(b)(1) is the prisoner analog to 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e), which allows the court to dismiss any in forma pauperis complaint if it is, among other

things, "frivolous or malicious." The district court may dismiss under § 1915 "a complaint 'that

Case 3:15-cv-04518-LB Document 13 Filed 12/08/15 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

15-cv-4518 LB

ORDER 2

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

merely repeats pending or previously litigated claims.'" 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 litigation of virtually identical causes of action is subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. §

1915 as malicious); Van Meter v. Morgan, 518 F.2d 366 (8th Cir. 1975) (dismissal of complaint as

frivolous was not an abuse of discretion where plaintiff had filed other similar complaints). 

The complaint in this action repeats claims made by Mr. Bolton in Bolton v. Asian Sheriff

Officer, Case No. 15-cv-4517 LB. Although the complaint is difficult to understand, it is based on

the same core set of facts alleged in the earlier case, i.e., a search and seizure on San Pablo Dam

Road during which an “Asian Sheriff Officer” detained Mr. Bolton, took his “profit shares” and put

him in a “medic van” from which Mr. Bolton escaped. (ECF No. 1 at 2-3.) The court has

considered and rejected the possibility that the complaint in this action may have been filed due to

an error at the courthouse. First, the complaints in the two cases are both ink originals, have slightly

different wording, and came in separate envelopes. Second, Mr. Bolton has sent several letters to

the court about these cases, never mentioning that the second complaint was merely a handwritten

copy of the first complaint. This action is DISMISSED as frivolous because the claims alleged are

duplicative of those raised in the earlier case, i.e., Case No. C 15-4517 LB. 

The clerk shall close the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 8, 2015 _______________________________

LAUREL BEELER

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-04518-LB Document 13 Filed 12/08/15 Page 2 of 2