CEPEDA v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Filing
6
ORDER OF DISMISSAL re accepting 5 Report and Recommendation.The clerk must enter judgment stating, "This case is dismissed without prejudice." The clerk must close the file. Signed by JUDGE ROBERT L HINKLE on 4/10/2018. (jcw)
Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION
ROBERTO CEPEDA,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASE NO. 5:17cv266-RH/GRJ
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Defendant.
_____________________________/
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This case is before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation ECF No. 5. No objections have been filed.
The order of October 27, 2017 gave the plaintiff an opportunity to file an
amended complaint. The plaintiff has not done so, and the deadline has long
passed. The report and recommendation correctly concludes that the case should be
dismissed on this basis.
The original complaint—the only complaint the plaintiff has filed—names
only a single defendant: the State of Florida. The claims against the State are
apparently barred by the Eleventh Amendment. See Seminole Tribe of Fla. v.
Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996) (holding that a state sued in its own name has
Case No. 5:17cv266-RH/GRJ
Page 2 of 2
Eleventh Amendment immunity, regardless of the relief sought, unless the
immunity has been waived or validly abrogated by Congress). The plaintiff has not
asserted a claim under any statute valid abrogating Eleventh Amendment
immunity. In any event, the plaintiff’s failure to file an amended complaint as
ordered, standing alone, is sufficient for dismissal.
For these reasons,
IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation is accepted. The clerk must enter judgment
stating, “This case is dismissed without prejudice.” The clerk must close the file.
SO ORDERED on April 10, 2018.
s/Robert L. Hinkle
United States District Judge
Case No. 5:17cv266-RH/GRJ
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?