Moreno v. Pena

Background

Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero recommended dismissing Jose Rigoberto Moreno’s amended complaint with prejudice because an earlier judgment in a related proceeding barred the claims. Moreno filed a document that the court construed as an objection to that recommendation.

In the earlier related proceeding, the court had dismissed Moreno’s claims after reviewing his pleadings under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court later dismissed his civil-rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 with prejudice after considering his failure to prosecute and other factors. The earlier case was then dismissed with prejudice.

Analysis

Moreno filed this action asserting substantially similar § 1983 claims against San Francisco police officers involved in the alleged January 23, 2019 incident. The court agreed that claim preclusion, also called res judicata, applied. It found that the claims in the two cases arose from sufficiently identical facts, that the earlier dismissal and entry of judgment constituted a final judgment, and that the parties were the same.

Moreno argued that the cases were different because he used a Social Security category on the earlier civil cover sheet and an “Other Civil Rights” category on the cover sheet for this case. The court held that the different category markings did not change the fact that both cases involved sufficiently identical § 1983 claims concerning the same incident.

Disposition

Judge Orrick adopted Magistrate Judge Spero’s report and recommendation in full. The court ordered that Moreno’s amended complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE based on the preclusive effect of the judgment entered in the earlier related proceeding.