United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION RE: DKT. NO.
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY United States Magistrate Judge.
an inmate in the Federal Detention Center in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, filed this pro se civil rights complaint
against Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”), and a number
of “Doe” defendants who are “agents”
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“F.B.I.”)
and other “unknown” federal
agencies. He was granted leave to proceed in forma
case was dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) as
frivolous because the complaint duplicated an in forma
pauperis complaint Plaintiff filed in a prior case,
Credico v. Facebook, Inc., et al., No. 14-0881 JS
(E.D. Pa.), which case was dismissed for failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted. See Cato v.
United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1105 n.2 (9th Cir. 1995)
(in forma pauperis complaint that merely repeats pending or
previously litigated claims may be considered frivolous and
dismissed under the authority of 28 U.S.C. §
1915(d)); Bailey v. Johnson, 846 F.2d
1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 1988) (in forma pauperis complaint that
repeats previously litigated claims may be dismissed).
has filed a motion for reconsideration. Rule 60(b) provides
for relief from final judgment where one or more of the
following is shown: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or
excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due
diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for
a new trial; (3) fraud by the adverse party; (4) the judgment
is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied; (6) any other
reason justifying relief. Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). Plaintiff does
not specify what provision of Rule 60(b) compels relief from
judgment, but based on his argument, the only provision that
would appear to apply is Rule 60(b)(6).
argues that this Court should not have dismissed this case
under the doctrine of res judicata because the prior
dismissal was not done by a court of “competent
jurisdiction.” In support of his argument that the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania was not of “competent
jurisdiction, ” Plaintiff cites the “click wrap
agreement” of Facebook, Inc., which he asserts requires
that all claims against Facebook, Inc., be brought in the
Northern District of California.
case was not dismissed on the grounds of res judicata,
however. Plaintiff filed his in forma pauperis complaint in
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and after he lost
there, he filed the same complaint in this Court again
seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Under
Cato, that renders this instant in forma pauperis
complaint frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). In
Cato, the Court held that “there is no abuse
of discretion where a district court dismisses an in forma
pauperis complaint ‘that merely repeats pending or
previously litigated claims’” 345 F.3d at 1105
n.2 (quoting Bailey, 846 F.2d at 1021, and citing
Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 30, (1992)
(recognizing Congress's concern that “a litigant
whose filing fees and court costs are assumed by the public,
unlike a paying litigant, lacks an economic incentive to
refrain from filing frivolous, malicious, or repetitive
lawsuits”). As in Cato, the dismissal of the
instant case was based on Section 1915(e)’s bar on
filing repetitive in forma pauperis lawsuits. It is noted,
that the dismissal, although with prejudice, does not
preclude Plaintiff from pursuing his claims in a paid
complaint. See Id. To the extent that Plaintiff
believes the Eastern District of Pennsylvania did not have
jurisdiction to decide his claims, he can make that argument
in that court, on appeal from that court’s decision, or
in response to a res judicata argument raised in a new action
in which he pays the filing fee.
motion for reconsideration of the dismissal order is DENIED.
IS SO ORDERED.
undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the
Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District
August 1, 2016, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the
attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid
envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said
copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in
the Clerk's office.
Credico ID: Prisoner Id. 71239066 Federal Detention
Center 700 Arch Street P.O. Box 562 Philadelphia, PA 19105.