Rodriguez Cruz v. Catherine

Filing 4

ORDER Dismissing Case. Signed by Judge Darrin P. Gayles on August 2, 2022. See attached document for full details. (hs01) Modified Text on 8/3/2022 (ls).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 22-cv-22422-GAYLES
FRANCISCO RODRIGUEZ CRUZ,
v.

Plaintiff,

CATHERINE,
Defendant,
______________________________/
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on a sua sponte review of the record. Plaintiff,
appearing pro se, filed this action on August 2, 2022. [ECF No. 1]. The same day, Plaintiff
moved to proceed in forma pauperis. [ECF No. 3]. Because Plaintiff has moved to proceed in
forma pauperis, the screening provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e), are applicable. Pursuant to that statute, the court is permitted to dismiss a suit “any time
[] the court determines that . . . (B) the action or appeal (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to
state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant
who is immune from such relief.” Id. § 1915(e)(2).
The standards governing dismissals for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)
are the same as those governing dismissals under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Alba
v. Montford, 517 F.3d 1249, 1252 (11th Cir. 2008). To state a claim for relief, a pleading must
contain “(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction . . . ; (2) a short
and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand
for the relief sought.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. To survive a motion to dismiss, a claim “must contain
sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,

570 (2007)). “[T]he pleadings are construed broadly,” Levine v. World Fin. Network Nat’l Bank,
437 F.3d 1118, 1120 (11th Cir. 2006), and the allegations in the complaint are viewed in the light
most favorable to the plaintiff, Hawthorne v. Mac Adjustment, Inc., 140 F.3d 1367, 1370 (11th Cir.
1998). At bottom, the question is not whether the claimant “will ultimately prevail . . . but whether
his complaint [is] sufficient to cross the federal court’s threshold.” Skinner v. Switzer, 562 U.S.
521, 530 (2011).
In his Complaint, Plaintiff attempts to assert a claim against Catherine, a “staff member
at Larkin Hospital.” [ECF No. 1]. Plaintiff alleges that his mother fell and was injured while
in Catherine’s care. Id. Plaintiff’s Complaint contains no details about Defendant or her wrongdoing. Moreover, Plaintiff appears to be asserting a claim on behalf of his mother and, therefore, is unlikely to have standing. As a result, Plaintiff fails to satisfy the pleading requirements
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. Therefore, this action must be
dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice and
CLOSED for administrative purposes. All pending motions are DENIED as MOOT.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 2nd day of August, 2022.

________________________________
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2