IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 14, 2012
ANTHONY COLEMAN, PLAINTIFF,
MATTHEW CATE, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER and FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff's complaint was filed with the court on June 4, 2012. The court's own records reveal that on June 4, 2012, plaintiff filed another complaint containing virtually identical allegations against the same defendants. (No. Civ. S-12-1496 CKD P ).*fn1 Due to the duplicative nature of the present action, the court will recommend that this second-filed complaint be dismissed.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Clerk of Court randomly assign a district judge to this case; and
2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) is denied as moot.
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 fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is 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).