Martinez v. Heintzmann et al

Filing 12

ORDER: The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #10) is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order Per Federal Rule 60 and Motion to Take Leave of Court to Amend Claim Removing Immune Jud icial Defendants as Contained Herein (Dkt. #11) are DENIED. Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to close this case and terminate any pending motions as moot. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr on 6/10/2014. (LN)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
HERBERT MARTINEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 8:14-cv-215-T-30MAP

KURT HEINTZMANN, STEVEN
TONER, ANTHONY SCAGLIONE,
LISA HERNDON, FRANK MARTINEZ,
VICKIE MARTINEZ, MICHAEL
BECKWITH, BRYAN FAULKINGHAM,
GISELLE DEPIERO, WILLIAM
POWERS, AL NIENHUIS and BRAD
KING,
Defendants.

ORDER
THIS CAUSE came on for consideration upon the Report and Recommendation
submitted by Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo (Dkt. #10) and the Objections and Motion
for Relief from Judgment or Order Per Federal Rule 60 and Motion to Take Leave of Court
to Amend Claim Removing Immune Judicial Defendants as Contained Herein (Dkt. #11)
filed in response thereto.
After careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge, the Objections, Plaintiff’s motions, and in conjunction with an independent
examination of the file, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Pro se
Plaintiff’s motions for relief from judgment and for leave to amend are comprised of

incoherent and disjointed allegations not sufficient to illustrate that an amended complaint
would be meritorious. Any amendment would also be futile because Plaintiff still does
not allege an actionable claim. 1
ACCORDINGLY, it is therefore, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1.

The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #10) of the Magistrate Judge is

adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and is made a part of this order for all
purposes, including appellate review.
2.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order Per Federal Rule 60

and Motion to Take Leave of Court to Amend Claim Removing Immune Judicial
Defendants as Contained Herein (Dkt. #11) are DENIED.
3.

Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed without prejudice.

4.

The Clerk is directed to close this case and terminate any pending motions

as moot.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 10th day of June, 2014.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel/Parties of Record

1

Plaintiff has already filed an amended complaint (Dkt. #5) that contained confusing
allegations and lacked clarity. The allegations contained in Plaintiff’s instant motions are largely
repetitive of those contained in Plaintiff’s original and amended complaint.

2