FOGLEMAN v. OKALOOSA COUNTY PRE-TRIAL SERVICES et al

Filing 14

ORDER ADOPTING IN PART 13 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The Plaintiff is ordered to file a Second Amended Complaint that corrects the deficiencies described in this Order within 30 days or the case will be closed and judgment will be entered dismissing this action with prejudice. (Second Amended Complaint due by 6/5/2017. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 5/5/2017. (sdw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
JEREMY S. FOGELMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 3:16cv183/MCR/CJK

OKALOOSA COUNTY PRE-TRIAL
SERVICES,
Defendant.
___________________________________/
ORDER
This cause comes on for consideration of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation dated September 15, 2016. ECF No. 13. Plaintiff has been
furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an
opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section
636(b)(1). No objections were filed. The Court has determined that the Report and
Recommendation should be adopted in part and rejected in part.
Generally, “a district court must grant a plaintiff at least one opportunity to
amend their [sic] claims before dismissing them if it appears a more carefully drafted
complaint might state a claim upon which relief can be granted even if the plaintiff
never seeks leave to amend.” Silva v. Bieluch, 351 F.3d 1045, 1048–49 (11th Cir.

Case No. 3:16-cv-183/MCR/CJK

Page 2 of 3

2003) (internal quotations omitted). Plaintiff was previously given an opportunity
to “clarify” his allegations, ECF No. 7 at 1, and he made a good faith attempt to
plead with specificity as directed. While Plaintiff did not plead the claim with
sufficient specificity to satisfy Rule 8 and the Twombly/Iqbal principles as discussed
in the Report and Recommendation, based on this record and in deference to
Plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court cannot “exclude the possibility” that the Plaintiff
may be able to state a cognizable claim with a more carefully drafted complaint.
Walker v. Mobile Police Dep’t, No. CV 17-0117-WS-M, 2017 WL 1398654, at *4
(S.D. Ala. Apr. 18, 2017). Thus, while the Court concurs with Judge Khan’s
recommendation that Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted, in light of the Plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court finds that one
additional opportunity to amend should be allowed.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1.

The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No.
13, is adopted in part and incorporated by reference in this Order.

2.

The Plaintiff is ordered to file a Second Amended Complaint that
corrects the deficiencies described in this Order within 30 days

Case No. 3:16cv183/MCR/CJK

Page 3 of 3

or the case will be closed and judgment will be entered
dismissing this action with prejudice.

DONE AND ORDERED this 5th day of May, 2017.

M. Casey Rodgers
M. CASEY RODGERS
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No. 3:16cv183/MCR/CJK