Masi v. Glynn County Detention Center

Filing 14

ORDER ADOPTING 12 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge as the opinion of the Court. The Court OVERRULES Masi's Objections, DISMISSES Plaintiff's Complaint, and DIRECTS the Clerk to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case. The Court DENIES Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 3/10/2017. (ca)

J^tl tlfie Untteli States: Btsitrict Court
Jfor tlie ^outl^em Btsitnct of (fleorsta
Prunfiitoick Btbtsiton

FILED
Scott L. Poff, Clerk
United States District Court

By casbell at 11:33 am, Mar 10, 2017

JAMES MASI,

Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:17-cv-l

V.

GLYNN COUNTY DETENTION CENTER,

*
*

Defendant.

*

ORDER

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff James Masi's

C^Masi") Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation dated February 8, 2017.^

Dkt. No. 13.

In his

Objections, Masi objects to the Magistrate Judge's
Recommendation that this Court dismiss his Complaint for failure

Although Masi's pleading is docketed as a ^^letter" to the Court, a

review of that pleading reveals that he is objecting to the Magistrate
Judge's recommendation that that Court dismiss his Complaint. Dkt.
No. 13. ''^Federal courts sometimes will ignore the legal label that a
pro se litigant attaches to a motion and recharacterize the motion in
order to place it within a different legal category." Retic v. United
States, 215 F. App'x 962, 964 (11th Cir. 2007) (quoting Castro v.

United States, 540 U.S. 375, 381 (2003)). Federal courts ^^may do so
in order to avoid an unnecessary dismissal, to avoid inappropriately
stringent application of formal labeling requirements, or to create a
better correspondence between the substance of a pro se motion's claim
and its underlying legal basis." Id. (quoting Castro, 540 U.S. at
381-82). Accordingly, Masi's letter is properly classified as an
Objection to the Report and Recommendation.

to follow the Court's Order to amend his Complaint and for

failure to state a claim.

Id. at p. 1.

Plaintiff asserts that

he amended his Complaint, as ordered by the Court, but failed to
submit his Amended Complaint via certified mail.

p. 1.

Dkt. No. 13,

Plaintiff appears to argue, in the alternative, that he

was unable to amend his Complaint because jail staff refused to

provide him paper or envelopes.

Id.

The Court OVERRULES Masi's Objections.

Plaintiff's

submission of seven letters to the Court, dkt nos. 4, 5, 7, 8,

9, 10, 11, following the Court's Order directing Plaintiff to
amend his Complaint, dkt. no. 3, belies his contention that he

was prevented from timely filing an amendment to his Complaint.
Accordingly, after an independent and de novo review of the

entire record, the Court CONCURS with and ADOPTS the Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 12, as the opinion
of the Court, DISMISSES Plaintiff's Complaint, and DIRECTS the
Clerk of Court to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal
and to CLOSE this case.

The Court DENIES Plaintiff leave to

appeal in forma pauperis on appeal.
SO ORDERED, this

day

_, 2017.

LI;5A GODBEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE
[ITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

'SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA