(PC) Bjorlin v. Morrow et al, No. 2:2010cv02217 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 9/13/10 recommending that this action be dismissed as duplicative and frivolous. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Bjorlin v. Morrow et al Doc. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DANIEL P. BJORLIN, 11 Plaintiff, 12 vs. 13 No. CIV S-10-2217 GEB GGH P MORROW, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 / 16 17 ORDER & FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and application to proceed in forma pauperis. 18 Plaintiff filed this action on August 18, 2010, however court records indicate that 19 plaintiff filed the exact same case on August 13, 2010, CIV S-10-2162 FCD KJN.1 Due to the 20 duplicative nature of the present action, the court finds this action frivolous and, therefore, will 21 recommend that this action be dismissed. Adams v. Cal. Dept. of Health Services, 487 F.3d 684, 22 688 (9th Cir. 2007); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). This court will not rule on petitioner’s request to 23 proceed in forma pauperis. 24 \\\\\ 25 1 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). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed as duplicative and frivolous. 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned 4 to this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being 5 served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the 6 court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 7 Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen 8 days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 9 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 10 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 DATED: September 13, 2010 12 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 13 GREGORY G. HOLLOWS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 GGH:ab bjor2217.dis 16 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.
