Banks v. Pivnichny et al
ORDER adopting 10 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (1) The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and is made a part of this Order for all purposes, including ap pellate review. (2) Plaintiff's Complaint 1 is DISMISSED. (3) Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 2 is DENIED. (4) The Clerk is directed to terminate all pending deadlines and close this file. Signed by Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell on 8/21/2015. (BGS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TIMOTHY PIVNICHNY, JAMES
COMEY, BARACK OBAMA, FBI, PAUL
HULL, MARY BETH BUCHANAN,
BRENDAN T. CONWAY, NORA BARRY
FISCHER, JIM BRENNAN, CIA, CIA
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY, THOMAS HARDIMAN,
CYNTHIA REED EDDY, MITT
ROMNEY, HILLARY RODHAM
CLINTON, RALPH SHRADER, BOOZ
ALLEN HAMILTON, JOY FLOWERS
CONTI, CHARMAINE ODOM, BEN
ORRISON, RONALD NEEPER, DR.
WEINSTEIN, ANNE CUCCIO, CHARLES
SAMUELS, DAVID ANDERCHAK,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
PENNSYLVANIA, UNITED STATES
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES COURTS, UNITED
STATES SENATE, UNITED STATES
CONGRESS, RICHARD BURR,
TORSTEN OVE, PITTSBURGH POST
GAZETTE, ANNE C. CONWAY,
ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH,
STEVEN D. MERRYDAY, JAMES D.
WHITTEMORE, JOHN E. STEELE,
TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN, VIRGINIA
COVINGTON, MARCIA MORALES
HOWARD, MARY S. SCRIVEN,
CHARLENE E. HONEYWELL, ROY B.
DALTON, JR. , SHERI POLSTER
CHAPPELL, BRIAN J. DAVIS, PAUL G.
BYRON, CARLOS E. MENDOZA,
GEORGE C. YOUNG, WM. TERRELL
HODGES, HOWELL W. MELTON,
WILLIAM J. CASTAGNA, G. KENDALL
Case No: 8:15-cv-1299-T-36JSS
SHARP, HARVEY E. SCHLESINGER,
SUSAN C. BUCKLEW, PATRICIA C.
FAWSETT, HENRY LEE ADAMS, JR. ,
RICHARD A. LAZZARA, GREGORY A.
PRESNELL, JOHN ANTOON, II , JAMES
S. MOODY, JR. , THOMAS G. WILSON,
ELIZABETH A. JENKINS, DAVID A.
BAKER, THOMAS B. MCCOUN, III ,
MARK A. PIZZO, KARLA R.
SPAULDING, DOUGLAS N. FRAZIER,
MONTE C. RICHARDSON, JAMES R.
KLINDT, GREGORY J. KELLY,
ANTHONY E. PORCELLI, JOEL B.
TOOMEY, THOMAS B. SMITH, PHILIP
R. LAMMENS, PATRICIA D.
BARKSDALE and CAROL MIRANDO,
This cause comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation filed by
Magistrate Judge Julie S. Sneed on August 3, 2015 (Doc. 10). In the Report and Recommendation,
Magistrate Judge Sneed recommends that Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) be DISMISSED and
Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) be DENIED.1 Plaintiff was
furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and afforded the opportunity to file
objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). No such objections were filed.
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, and upon this Court's independent
examination of the file, it is determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, it is now
The undersigned district judge is named as a Defendant in Plaintiff’s Complaint, as are all of
the district judges in this district. Under the rule of necessity, this does not bar the instant ruling
on Plaintiff’s motion. See Davis v. Kvalheim, 261 F. App’x 231, 233-34 (11th Cir. 2008) (stating
that “under the rule of necessity, when a defendant indiscriminately brings suit against all of the
judges of a court, the judges may hear the case if there is no other judge from that court available
to hear it”) (citations omitted).
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 10) is adopted,
confirmed, and approved in all respects and is made a part of this Order for all
purposes, including appellate review.
Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED.
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED.
The Clerk is directed to terminate all pending deadlines and close this file.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida on August 21, 2015.
The Honorable Julie S. Sneed
Counsel of Record
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?