BLAKE v. ALLEN

On September 29, 2010, the plaintiff appeared pro se before the United States Magistrate Judge to whom this matter is referred and requested that this matter be voluntarily dismissed. On September 30, 2010, the Magistrate Judge entered an Order [Docket 9] dismissing the action with prejudice. The plaintiff has now filed an Amended Complaint [Docket 12] naming the same defendants and asserting the same claims as the original Complaint. Where the plaintiff seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, as is the case here, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the action is "frivolous or malicious" or "fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The plaintiff's Amended Complaint is clearly barred by res judicata because his original Complaint, arising out of the same events and naming the same parties as defendants, was dismissed with prejudice. See Cieszkowska v. Gray Line N.Y., 295 F.3d 204, 206 (2d Cir. 2002). Accordingly, the court DISMISSES the Amended Complaint with prejudice pursuant to § 1915(e)(2) because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

The court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.

ENTER: November 3, 2010