Opinion
No. 2:16-cv-0927 KJN P
05-10-2016
EDWARD BRIDGEMAN, Plaintiff, v. R. FOX, et al., Defendants.
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. Plaintiff's complaint was filed with the court on May 2, 2016. The court's own records reveal that on December 14, 2015, plaintiff filed a complaint containing virtually identical allegations. (Case No. 2:15-cv-2579 JAM AC.) Due to the duplicative nature of the present action, the court recommends that the complaint be dismissed. Plaintiff must file all of his Eighth Amendment claims arising from defendants' alleged failure to properly treat his cancer in one action, Case No. 2:15-cv-2579 JAM AC.
A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980). --------
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and //// ////
IT IS 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." 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). Dated: May 10, 2016
/s/_________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE /cw/brid0927.23