(PC)Garcia v. Six Unknown Agents or Mr President of the United States Barack Obama, No. 1:2013cv01949 - Document 2 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending that this 1 Action be Dismissed with Prejudice signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/6/2013. Referred to Judge Anthony W. Ishii. Objections to F&R due by 12/23/2013. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARIO E. GARCIA, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. SIX UKNOWN AGENTS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:13-cv-01949-AWI-SAB (PC) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING COMPLAINT FILED PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Plaintiff Mario E. Garcia is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 17 18 1983. While this action is brought in the name of Luis Quintanilla and Young Yil Jo, the Court 19 recognizes the handwriting and substance of the complaint to be brought by Young Yil Jo only.1 20 I. 21 DISCUSSION 22 To date, Plaintiff Young Yil Jo has filed over one-hundred fifty civil cases in this district. The 23 complaint filed in this action is not signed and it sets forth no intelligible claims for relief, and fails to 24 state any cognizable claims under federal law. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-668 (2009); Bell 25 Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Given this litigant’s abusive filing practices in 26 27 1 28 In addition, the complaint arrived in an envelope with several other complaints, all with different plaintiffs. The envelope bore the name of Young Yil Jo, who is housed at Etowah County Jail. 1 1 this district, and the utterly incoherent pleading before the Court, leave to amend is not warranted. 2 Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2000). Federal courts, as all courts, are for the serious 3 presentation of cases in which litigants wish to have their matters heard. Plaintiff is not one who takes 4 this claim with any serious indication that he intends to pursue a righteous claim. 5 As for dismissing this case with prejudice, this Plaintiff has filed over one hundred and fifty 6 civil cases in this district and in a variety of names involving the similar claims and similar lack of any 7 facts which comport with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff has been admonished by 8 numerous judges of this court and yet still heeds no warning. This Court has previously warned 9 Plaintiff that the filing of frivolous claims with no basis in law or fact may result in monetary 10 sanctions. (1:13-cv-00750-AWI-SAB, ECF No. 2.) The Court will issue a separate sanctioning order 11 in addition to dismissing Plaintiff’s claim with prejudice. 12 II. 13 RECOMMENDATION 14 Accordingly, 15 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 16 This Findings and Recommendation is submitted to the assigned United States District Court 17 Judge, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of 18 Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Within fourteen (14) days 19 after being served with a copy, Plaintiff may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on 20 all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 21 Recommendation.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 22 waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 23 24 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 6, 2013 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.