United States District Court for the Southern District of California, 2021

Allen v. Diaz

Allen v. Diaz
United States District Court for the Southern District of California · Decided July 19, 2021
Allen v. Diaz

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARLES EDWARD ALLEN, Case No.: 21-CV-1188 JLS (JLB) CDCR # D-76353

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

Plaintiff, v.

RALPH DIAZ, et al.,

Defendants.

On June 28, 2021, Plaintiff Charles Edward Allen, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights action (ECF No. 1), along with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 2).

Plaintiff filed a previous action involving the same claims and same defendants on April 6, 2021. See Allen v. Diaz, S.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 3:21-cv-00602-LAB-RBM (“Allen I”). A court “may take notice of proceedings in other courts, both within and without the federal judicial system, if those proceedings have a direct relation to matters at issue.” Bias v. Moynihan, 508 F.3d 1212, 1225 (9th Cir. 2007) (quoting Bennett v. Medtronic, Inc., 285 F.3d 801, 803 n.2 (9th Cir. 2002)).

In Allen I, Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed IFP was denied on June 2, 2021, because he had not submitted a trust account statement in support of his IFP motion that included all trust account activity and balances for the 6-month period preceding the filing of that /action. See Allen I, ECF No. 5 at 3. Plaintiff was granted forty-five (45) days to file a renewed Motion to Proceed IFP that complied with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Id. at 4. Plaintiff filed this action, which includes a Motion to Proceed IFP along with a trust account statement that complies with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2), within the timeframe permitted in the June 2, 2021, Order entered in Allen I. However, Plaintiff failed to label these pleadings with the proper case number and a separate action was opened. Thus, it appears that Plaintiff did not intend to file a new action but is, in fact, responding to the Order issued on June 2, 2021 in Allen I.

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to administratively close this matter. This matter will not constitute a “strike” for 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) purposes. Plaintiff cautioned that in order to proceed in Allen I, he must comply with the Court’s June 2, 2021, Order and correctly label all his future filings in A//en I with the proper case number. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 19, 2021 . tt f Le on. Janis L. Sammartino United States District Judge

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.