# (PC) Brown v. Katz

> District Court, E.D. California · February 2, 2022

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10033274

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. California
- **Decided:** February 2, 2022
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10033274

## Opinion text

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 RONNIE CHEROKEE BROWN, No. 2:21-cv-02288-EFB P
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
14 D. KATZ,
15 Defendant.
16
17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42
18 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that defendant used excessive force against him on March 25, 2020 by
19 slamming his hand in the food port of his cell. ECF No. 1 at 4. Plaintiff raised the same claim
20 against defendant in Case No. 2:20-cv-02386-EFB (E.D. Cal.) (“Brown I”). Plaintiff dismissed
21 that case with prejudice on February 3, 2021 following an agreed-upon settlement. Brown I, ECF
22 No. 18. Accordingly, he is precluded from raising the claim again in this court. Semtek Int’l Inc.
23 v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497, 505-06 (2001) (a voluntary dismissal with prejudice
24 bars further action on the same claim in the same court); Wojciechowski v. Kohlberg Ventures,
25 LLC, 923 F.3d 685, 689-90 (9th Cir. 2019) (a court-approved settlement followed by a judgment
26 entered with prejudice has preclusive effect).
27 /////
28 /////
] It is therefore ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a United States District
2 | Judge to this action; and it 1s further RECOMMENDED that the District Judge dismiss the instant
3 | case as barred by the dismissal, with prejudice, of Case No. 2:20-cv-02385-EFB.
4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
5 | assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days
6 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
7 | objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
8 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections
9 | within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.
10 | Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
11 | Dated: February 2, 2022.
12
13 Vp ZZ,
4 EDMUND F.
15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10033274. Public record. Not legal advice.