Abellav.Simon

United States District Court, S.D. FloridaJun 15, 2011
Case No. 11-20152-CIV-ALTONAGA/SIMONTON (S.D. Fla. Jun. 15, 2011)

Case No. 11-20152-CIV-ALTONAGA/SIMONTON.

June 15, 2011


ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO MAKE CORRECTION AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION REQUESTING EXTENSION OF TIME, AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE


ANDREA SIMONTON, Magistrate Judge

Before the Court are (a) Plaintiff's Motion to Make Correction on Defendant Nancy Simon Inclusion of the Amended Complaint (DE # 37), (b) Plaintiff's Motion Requesting Extension of Time to Respond (DE # 38), and (c) Defendant Nancy Simon's Motion to Strike or, in the Alternative, Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Deny Simon's Motion to Dismiss (DE # 51). The Honorable Cecilia M. Altonaga, United States District Judge, has referred this case to the undersigned Magistrate Judge with respect to rulings on all pretrial, non-dispositive matters, and for issuance of a report and recommendation with respect to any dispositive matter (DE # 8, 24). This Order sets forth the rulings on these Motions and the reasons for such rulings. It is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Plaintiff's Motion to Make Correction on Defendant Nancy Simon Inclusion of the Amended Complaint (DE # 37) is GRANTED. " Pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than pleadings drafted by attorneys and will, therefore, be liberally construed." Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). The undersigned notes that while the capacity in which Defendant Nancy Simon has been sued is unclear in the caption of the Amended Complaint, the allegations of the Amended Complaint address Ms. Simon in her individual capacity and as an elected official. Moreover, the undersigned notes that Defendant Simon's Motion to Dismiss or for a More Definite Statement has addressed both capacities (DE # 36). Therefore, the caption of this case shall be amended by interlineation to include as a Defendant "Nancy Simon, in both her individual and official capacities," thus clarifying the Amended Complaint. This Order, however, does not constitute a ruling on the merits of Defendant's pending Motion to Dismiss or for a More Definite Statement, nor does this amendment by interlineation constitute a new pleading. Since it is merely a clarification of the intent of the pro se Plaintiff, the pending Motions to Dismiss are unaffected and remain pending.

2. Plaintiff's Motion Requesting Extension of Time to Respond (DE # 38) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion to Deny Defendant Nancy Simon's Motion to Dismiss or for a More Definite Statement (DE # 42) shall be deemed a timely response to Defendant's Motion. Defendant Simon may reply to Plaintiff's response within seven days of this Order.

3. Defendant Nancy Simon's Motion to Strike or, in the Alternative, Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Deny Simon's Motion to Dismiss (DE # 51) is DENIED, based on the undersigned's ruling above that Plaintiff's Motion to Deny (DE # 42) shall be deemed a timely response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, and that Defendant Simon shall have an opportunity to file a reply.

DONE AND ORDERED in chambers in Miami, Florida.