Hosea v. Office of Hearing Operations et al
| Jason Hosea |
| Office of Hearing Operations, SSA OHO Hearing Office, Sarah Brown, Social Security Administration, Office of Appellate Operations, US Court of Clerk and OSF St Joseph Medical Center |
| 1:2024cv01063 |
| February 5, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Jonathan E Hawley |
| Michael M Mihm |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 9, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 JUDGMENT entered. (JMB) |
TEXT ONLY ORDER: On 02/06/2024, pro se Plaintiff filed a #1 Complaint, #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, and #3 Motion to Request Counsel. Accordingly, the Court screened the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1915(e)(2)(B) and found it to be duplicative of Plaintiff's previously filed lawsuit in Hosea v. Soc. Sec. Admin., et al, No. 24-1060-JES-JEH (C.D. Ill. Jan. 2, 2024), (D. 1). The primary difference in this case is that Plaintiff adds as Defendants the "U.S. Court of Clerk, Rock Island," and "U.S. Court of Clerk, Peoria." (D. 1). If Plaintiff would like to add new parties to his previously filed complaint, he must do so by filing an amended complaint in Hosea, No. 24-1060. Plaintiff cannot proceed in this case on the same claims against the same defendants in his previously filed lawsuit. See Jones v. Mooney, 2018 WL 3631292, at *1 (S.D. Ill. July 30, 2018) (quoting Serlin v. Arthur Andersen & Co., 3 F.3d 221, 223 (7th Cir. 1993) (holding that "wise judicial administration" permits "dismissal of a federal suit that parallels another action in federal court")). Moreover, because Plaintiff is pursuing both actions under the in forma pauperis statute, dismissal is required if an action is deemed frivolous or malicious. Here, Plaintiff's action is malicious because it duplicates the same claims against the same defendants of another pending lawsuit. See id. (citing Pittman v. Moore, 980 F.2d 994, 99495 (5th Cir. 1993)). Accordingly, Plaintiff's #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED and #3 Motion to Request Counsel is MOOT. The Court DISMISSES the Complaint without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE the case. Entered by Judge Michael M. Mihm on 02/09/2023. (JMB)
|
| Filing 3 MOTION to Request Counsel by Plaintiff Jason Hosea. Responses due by 2/20/2024 (JMB) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Jason Hosea. Responses due by 2/20/2024 (JMB) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Jason Hosea. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(JMB) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
