(PC) Proffitt v. Superior Court of the State of California in the County of Shasta et al, No. 2:2009cv00821 - Document 7 (E.D. Cal. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/20/09 ORDERING that the clerk is directed to randomly assign a U.S. District Judge to this action; RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice; objections are due within 20 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Gaydosh, J)

Download PDF
(PC) Proffitt v. Superior Court of the State of California in the County of Shasta et al Doc. 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 JERRY D. PROFFITT, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 No. CIV S-09-0821 DAD vs. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., ORDER AND 13 Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 / 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff’s complaint was filed with 17 the court on March 25, 2009. The court’s own records reveal that on March 2, 2009, plaintiff 18 had previously initiated an action by filing a document setting forth similar allegations 19 concerning his criminal trial in Shasta County. (No. CIV S-09-0610 GGH ).1 Due to the 20 duplicative nature of the present action, the court will recommend that the complaint in this 21 action be dismissed.2 22 ///// 23 1 24 25 26 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). 2 On March 27, 2009, plaintiff was ordered to file a complaint in case number CIV S-090610 GGH. Plaintiff is advised to set forth all his civil rights claims in the complaint filed in that action and to use the case file number, CIV S-09-0610 GGH, for all future filings. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. 3 4 Also, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned 6 to this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being 7 served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the 8 court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 9 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 10 may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 11 Cir. 1991). 12 DATED: April 20, 2009. 13 14 15 16 DAD:4 prof0821.23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2

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.