Valentinev.Dep't of Homeland Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISIONJul 14, 2014
Case No. 4:14cv68-RH/CAS (N.D. Fla. Jul. 14, 2014)

Case No. 4:14cv68-RH/CAS

07-14-2014

SANDRA ANNE VALENTINE, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, and TRANSPORT. SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This case was transferred to this Court by the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida in February 2014 because Plaintiff resided in Tallahassee. See doc. 3. Thereafter, the pro se Plaintiff was granted in forma pauperis status, docs. 7-8, and service of Plaintiff's amended complaint, doc. 10, was directed. Doc. 11. Defendant has now filed a motion to transfer the case back to the Middle District of Florida. Doc. 14. Defendant argues there is insufficient factual foundation to proceed in the Northern District of Florida, advising that the Tallahassee address used by Plaintiff "is actually a fictitious address provided to the Plaintiff by Florida's Address Confidentiality Program for victims of domestic violence." Id. at 1-2.

Because it was not clear from the allegations in the amended complaint where the events about which Plaintiff complains took place, an Order was entered requiring Plaintiff to file a response to the motion to transfer. Doc. 15. Plaintiff was simultaneously advised that "a civil action brought against an agency of the United States may be brought in any judicial district (1) a defendant resides; (2), a 'substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred,' or (3), if real property is not involved, where the plaintiff resides." Id., citing 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1). If Plaintiff believed this case should continue in the Northern District of Florida, Plaintiff was required to demonstrate one of the above criteria. Id. Plaintiff was informed that if she did not object to the motion, the case may be transferred to the Middle District. Id. Plaintiff did not respond to the Order, doc. 15, or the motion to transfer, doc. 14. Thus, because it appears undisputed that this case should proceed in the Middle District of Florida, the motion to transfer should be granted.

Finally, Defendant filed for a motion of time in which to respond to Plaintiff's amended complaint. Doc. 16. Defendant requests no specific date on which to file a response but requests an extending "pending the resolution of the motion to transfer." Id. at 2. The motion should be Granted and Defendant given fourteen days from the date this Report and Recommendation is adopted to file a response to Plaintiff's amended complaint.

In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that Defendant's unopposed motion to transfer, doc. 14, be GRANTED and this case be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division, for all further proceedings. It is further RECOMMENDED that Defendant's motion for an extension of time, doc. 16, be GRANTED and Defendant have fourteen days from the date the Order adopting this Report and Recommendation is entered on the docket in which to file a response to Plaintiff's amended complaint.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on July 14, 2014.

S/ Charles A. Stampelos


CHARLES A. STAMPELOS


UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.