IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 11, 2008
SERGEI & ELENA PORTNOY, PLAINTIFFS,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiffs are proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiffs' amended complaint is before the court. The court's own records reveal that on April 4, 2005, plaintiffs filed a complaint containing virtually identical allegations against the same defendants. (No. Civ. S-05-0649 DFL KJM PS).*fn1 That case resulted in a termination favorable to defendants, and was affirmed on appeal. Due to the duplicative nature of the present action, the court will recommend that the complaint be dismissed. See Adams v. Cal. Dept. Of Health Services, 487 F.3d 684, 688 (9th Cir. 2007).
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned to this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiffs may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiffs are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).