FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 29 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALVARO QUEZADA, No. 12-16824
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:09-cv-01856-LJO-
GBC
v.
R. FISHER, Captain; et al., MEMORANDUM*
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 13, 2014**
Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Alvaro Quezada appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as duplicative. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Adams
v. Cal. Dep’t of Health Servs., 487 F.3d 684, 688 (9th Cir. 2007), and we reverse
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
and remand.
Dismissal of Quezada’s action as duplicative of his action in Quezada v.
Hedgpeth, No. 1-08-cv-01404-FRZ (E.D. Cal filed Sept. 19, 2008) was an abuse of
discretion because the action does not involve the same parties. See id. at 688-89
(setting forth the standard for determining when a case is duplicative); see also
United States v. Bhatia, 545 F.3d 757, 759-60 (9th Cir. 2008) (describing the
circumstances in which a nonparty can be bound by a prior decision).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this
disposition.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
2 12-16824