(PC) Lollis v. Zell

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WILLIAM LOLLIS, No. 2:22-cv-0486 DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ZELL, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff’s complaint was filed with the court on March 15, 2022. The court’s records reveal that on March 8, 2022, plaintiff filed a complaint containing largely identical allegations, Lollis v. Zell, 2:22-cv-0433 DB P.1 Due to the duplicative nature of the present action, this court will recommend that the complaint be dismissed.

22 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court IS HEREBY ORDERED to randomly assign a district judge to this case; and 24 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. 25 P. 41(b).

26 //// A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 28 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980).

1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned to this || case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen days after being served || with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court.

4 || The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time || may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th | Cir. 1991).

8 || Dated: March 18, 2022 ll ‘BORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE || DLB:9 DB prisoner inbox/civil rights/R/loll0486.23