Unpublished Disposition, 857 F.2d 1477 (9th Cir. 1988)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Edward Diamontiney, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court's dismissal of his civil rights action without leave to amend his complaint.

A district court may dismiss an in forma pauperis action sua sponte if the action is frivolous or malicious. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). An action is frivolous if it has no basis in law or fact, or if it arises from the same series of events and alleges many of the same facts as another action filed by the same party. Bailey v. Johnson, 846 F.2d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 1988); see also Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Cir. 1987). Diamontiney's complaint in this action is identical to complaints he filed in two other actions. Accordingly, the district court did not err in dismissing this action as frivolous.

Courts must give pro se litigants an opportunity to amend their pleadings unless it is absolutely clear that the complaint's deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment. Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dept., 839 F.2d 621, 623 (9th Cir. 1988). Because any amendment that fell short of stating entirely different claims would have been insufficient to cure the deficiencies in Diamontiney's complaint, the district court did not err by dismissing the action without granting him leave to amend.

AFFIRMED.