PARKER v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Filing 7

ORDER GRANTING 3 MOTION FOR COURT TO ORDER PLAINTIFF TO RE-FILE COMPLAINT ON NORTHERN DISTRICT COURT-APPROVED COMPLAINT FORM filed by FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, granting 4 Notice of Removal (MOTION T O EXTEND TIME), filed by FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. The clerk is directed to mail plaintiff a 1983 complaint, ( Amended Pleadings due by 1/6/2012., (Internal deadline for referral to judge if response to amended complaint not filed earlier: 3/5/2012).). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 12/6/11. (bkp)

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
VICTOR PARKER,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 4:11-cv-609-SPM-GRJ

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
____________________________/
ORDER
Defendants, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Tate, Cabrero-Muniz,
Lowe, Scigliano, Edwards and Whidden removed this civil rights action to this Court on
December 1, 2011 by filing a Notice of Removal. (Doc. 4.) The state court record
reflects that on November 29, 2011 - prior to removal – the Defendants filed a Motion
for Enlargement of Time to respond to the Complaint. (Doc. 4-1.) Defendants also have
filed a Motion For Court to Order Plaintiff to Re-File Complaint on Court-Approved
Form. (Doc. 3.)
Turning first to Defendants’ Motion For Court to Order Plaintiff to Re-File
Complaint on Court-Approved Form, Defendants request that the Court direct Plaintiff
to utilize the Court’s pre-approved form because the form is comprehensive and
improves the efficiency of the Court. N.D.Fla.Loc. R. 5.1(J)(2) provides in relevant part
that “No ... civil action commenced by pro se litigants ... shall be considered by the court
unless the appropriate forms have been properly completed, signed, and filed by the
litigant.” One of the primary purposes of requiring pro se litigants to use the forms is to
focus the claims and relief requested so that the Court will better be able to screen the

Page 2 of 2

complaint to determine whether the action should proceed. Additionally, in the case of
litigants in custody of the Department of Corrections use of the form assists the Court in
determining whether a prisoner is subject to the PLRA’s “three strikes” provision and
the information required on the form assists the Court in efficiently managing prisoner
litigation by showing whether a complaint is related to or is affected by another case.
Although Plaintiff was not required to use the Court’s form because the complaint was
filed in state court, and the complaint is typed, the Court nonetheless, determines that
use of the Court’s form is necessary to efficiently manage this case. Accordingly,
Defendants’ Motion For Court to Order Plaintiff To Re-File Complaint On CourtApproved Form is due to be granted.
Defendants’ Motion For Enlargement of Time, filed in state court, also is due to
be granted, particularly in view of the fact that Plaintiff will be filing an amended
complaint on the Court’s approved form.
Accordingly, upon due consideration, it is ORDERED:
1. Defendants’ Motion For Court to Order Plaintiff to Re-File Complaint on
Court-Approved Form (Doc. 3) is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to send the
Plaintiff a blank pro se civil rights complaint form to be used by prisoners, which
Plaintiff shall complete in full and file on or before January 6, 2012.
2. Defendants’ Motion for Enlargement of Time to respond to the Complaint.
(Doc. 4-1) is GRANTED. Defendants shall file their response to the amended
complaint within sixty (60) days of the date the amended complaint is filed.
3. Failure to comply with this Order in the allotted time will result in a
recommendation to the district judge that this cause be dismissed.
DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of December 2011.

s/ Gary R. Jones s/GaryR.Jone
GARY R. JONES
United States Magistrate Judge
Case No: 4:11-cv-609-SPM-GRJ