1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9

10 KRISTIN HOFFMAN, Case No. 24-cv-04104-NC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 12 WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE v. DISMISSED WITHOUT 13 PREJUDICE AS DUPLICATIVE UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG 14 ADMINISTRATION, et al., Re: ECF 1 15 Defendants.

16 Self-represented Plaintiff Kristin Hoffman filed a complaint on July 8, 2024, that 17 contains the same allegations against the same defendants as in a separate case she already 18 has before the Court. Her allegations in this complaint are the same as in docket number 19 24-cv-00623-SVK before Judge Susan van Keulen. In 24-00623, Judge van Keulen 20 dismissed Hoffman’s claims with leave to amend “to bring any other claim that she 21 believes in good faith she may assert against Defendants.” 24-cv-00623-SVK, ECF 21 at 5 22 (emphasis in original). Judge van Keulen gave Hoffman until July 12, 2024 to file an 23 amended complaint. This essentially identical complaint was filed on July 8, 2024. 24 “Plaintiffs generally have no right to maintain two separate actions involving the 25 same subject matter at the same time in the same court and against the same defendant.” 26 Mendoza v. Amalgamated Transit Union Int’l,

(9th Cir.) (quotation 27 marks omitted). Having multiple identical cases is not efficient for the parties or the Court 1 If Hoffman meant to file an amended complaint in 24-cv-00623-SVK, she must file 2 || itin that docket. The Federal Pro Se Program at the San Jose Courthouse is a helpful 3 || resource for understanding the rules that apply to court filings and how to comply with 4 || them. Because Hoffman is representing herself, Hoffman may seek help from the 5 || Federal Pro Se Program, which provides free information and limited-scope legal 6 || advice. The Program is available by phone appointment at (408) 297-1480. Online 7 || resources are also available on the Court’s webpage (https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/pro- 8 || se-litigants/). 9 If Hoffman intended to challenge Judge van Keulen’s decision in 24-cv-00623- 10 || SVK, the proper method for that is appeal because a party cannot relitigate claims that 11 || have already been decided. Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc. v. Moitie,

, 398 12 || (1981) (A final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies 13 || from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.”). How to begin 14 || the appeal process is another area the Pro Se Program could help explain. 15 Because the complaint in this case contains the same allegations and defendants as 16 || another case filed with the Court, Hoffman must respond in writing by Friday, July 19, 5 17 || 2024, explaining why this case is different and should not be dismissed. The Court may 5 18 || dismiss this case without prejudice if Hoffman does not respond. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 || Dated: July 9, 2024 he ———— _ » United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28