Wetzel v. Louisiana Parole Board et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ANDREW DAVID WETZEL CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
LOUISIANA PAROLE BOARD, ET AL. NO. 26-00601-BAJ-RLB
RULING AND ORDER
Before the Court is Petitioner's fourth Petition For A Writ Of Habeas
Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1). On September 21, 2026, the Magistrate
Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 3, the "Report"),
recommending that the Court deny Petitioner s Petition with prejudice as duplicative
and deny Petitioner's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) as moot.
Petitioner s deadline to object to the Report has passed without any objection.
The Report explains that the Petition is duplicative of the other Petitions for a
Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 filed in No. 25-CV-00273-JWD-RLB,
No. 26-CV-00115-JWD-SDJ, and No. 26-CV-00505-SDD-RLB, as it asserts the same
claims presented in those petitions and against similar defendants. As the Report
explains, Petitioner is not entitled to maintain these similar, separate Section 2241
actions. Because this Petition is not the first one filed, the Court may dismiss it
pursuant to the first-filed rule. See, e.g., Oliney v. Gardner, 771 F.2d 856, 859
(5th Cir. 1985) (a plaintiff has "no right to maintain two separate actions involving
the same subject matter at the same time in the same court and against the same
defendant"); Save Power Ltd. v. Syntek Fin. Corp., 121 F.3d 947, 950 (5th Cir. 1997)
Case 3:26-cv-00601-BAJ-RLB Document 4 10/08/26 Page 1 of 3

("The Fifth Circuit adheres to the general rule that the court in which an action is
first filed is the appropriate court to determine whether subsequently filed cases
involving substantially similar issues should proceed."); Banks v. M-a'at,
No. 2:20-CV-1610, 2022 WL 3644070, at *2 (W.D. La. Aug. 5, 2022), report and
recommendation adopted, No. 2:20-CV-1610, 2022 WL 3636384 (W.D. La.
Aug. 23, 2022) (dismissing a subsequent Section 2241 Petition as duplicative because
it alleged the same claims as a previous Section 2241 Petition pursuant to the first-
filed rule); Benson v. Wolf, No. 6:20-CV-01051, 2020 WL 6143212, at *1 (W.D. La.
Sept. 24, 2020), report and recommendation adopted sub nom. Njuguna v. Wolf,
No. 6:20-CV-01051, 2020 WL 6064913 (W.D. La. Oct. 14, 2020) (same). The Court
instructs Petitioner that the continued filing of duplicative actions may result in
court-ordered sanctions.
Having carefully considered Plaintiffs Petition and the Report, the Court
APPROVES the Report and ADOPTS it as the Court's opinion in this matter.
Accordingly,
Case 3:26-cv-00601-BAJ-RLB Document 4 10/08/26 Page 2 of 3

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under
28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) be and is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED AS MOOT.
Judgment shall issue separately.
7^
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this _"_ ^ay of October, 2026
LG.
JUDGE BRIAN A. J[AJ3tCSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 3:26-cv-00601-BAJ-RLB Document 4 10/08/26 Page 3 of 3