Opinion
Case No. 05-CV-73908-DT.
October 31, 2005
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Petitioner Joseph Flowers has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a pro se habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The habeas petition challenges Petitioner's state convictions for second-degree murder, assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. The same convictions are the subject of another habeas petition filed by Petitioner. That petition currently is pending before United States District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. See Flowers v. Trombley, Case No. 05-CV-73539-DT (E.D. Mich. Sept. 15, 2005).
"[G]enerally, a suit is duplicative if the claims, parties, and available relief do not significantly differ between the two actions." Serlin v. Arthur Andersen Co., 3 F.3d 221, 223 (7th Cir. 1993) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). A district court, as part of its general power to administer its docket, "may stay or dismiss a case that is duplicative of another federal court suit." Curtis v. Citibank, N.A., 226 F.3d 133, 138 (2d Cir. 2000).Piedra v. Aguirre, 125 Fed. Appx. 968, 969 (10th Cir. 2005).
The habeas petition pending before this Court is identical to the one pending before Judge Rosen. Accordingly, Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #2, Oct. 12, 2005] is GRANTED, but his habeas petition [Doc. #1, Oct. 12, 2005] is DISMISSED without prejudice as duplicative of case number 05-CV-73539-DT.