MARTIN

v.

PETRUZZELLA

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the following matters: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to Pay Filing Fee And Request for Mailroom Search to Ensure Plaintiff Is Given All Legal Mail (Doc. 27) is DENIED. Plaintiff appears to (1) seek an extension of time to pay the partial filing fee, (2) request verification of whether his service forms were received, and (3) request the Court to order a search of the mailroom at Walton Correctional Institution. The Court received Plaintiff’s partial filing fee and service forms. Further, no basis exists for the Court to order the search of the Walton Correctional Institution mailroom. Rather, if Plaintiff believes his mail is not being delivered or received, he may initiate a civil rights complaint in the appropriate court having jurisdiction in which he may raise his claim.

2. Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Second Amended Civil Rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 11.) Because Plaintiff has failed to set forth his claims adequately, he will be required to submit a Third

Amended Complaint. In amending, Plaintiff must name as Defendants only those persons who are responsible for the alleged constitutional violations. It is improper for Plaintiff to merely list constitutional rights or federal rights. Plaintiff, therefore, must provide support for his claimed violation(s) in section IV.D entitled “Statement of Claim.” Plaintiff should attach additional pages if necessary to sufficiently state his claim(s).

Plaintiff shall not set forth the “facts” in a narrative chronology, but instead put the facts in sequentially numbered paragraphs. Rule 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that all averments of the claims “shall be made in numbered paragraphs” and limited to “a statement of a single set of circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Additionally, Rule 8 requires that pleadings include a short and plain statement of facts showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). In filing his Third Amended Complaint, Plaintiff is required to comply with these minimal pleading standards. Consequently, if Plaintiff intends to assert a claim for excessive force, he must indicate such and provide a brief, concise statement of facts supporting this claim in accordance with

Rules 8 and 10. Plaintiff should be aware that claims against Defendants in their official capacity are the same as a suit against the municipality. See Cooper v. Dillon, 403

F. 3d 1208, 1221 n.8 (11th Cir. 2005) (citing McMillian v. Monroe County, 520 U.S. 781, 785 n. 2 (1997)). “When suing local officials in their official capacities under § 1983, the plaintiff has the burden to show that a deprivation of constitutional rights occurred as a result of an official government policy or custom.” Id. at 1221 (footnote omitted) (citing Little v. City of North Miami, 805 F. 2d 962, 965 (11th Cir. 1986)). Therefore, absent facts demonstrating that the purported constitutional violations resulted from a policy, custom, pattern, or practice, Plaintiff cannot state a claim against Defendants in their official capacity. With respect to suits against a person in his or her individual capacity, it is well established that government agents are “shielded from liability for civil damages if their actions did not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 (2002) (quoting Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982)). When considering a plaintiff’s claim against a government actor in his or her individual capacity, the Court generally first determines “whether plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.” Id. at 736. To state a plausible claim for relief, the facts alleged by the plaintiff must contain sufficient allegations to show that the individual defendant personally participated in the alleged constitutional violation. See, e.g., Gonzalez v. Reno, 325 F. 3d 1228, 1234 (11th Cir. 2003). Indeed, there is no vicarious liability for constitutional claims against individual government actors: “[E]ach Government official, his or her title notwithstanding, is only liable for his or her own misconduct.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677 (2009). Although the complaint need not set forth detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff is required to provide more than mere “labels and conclusions” and the factual allegations “must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Indeed, the factual allegations must be sufficient “to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 570. Mere conclusory statements in support of a threadbare recital of the elements of a cause of action will not suffice. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The law requires something more “than an unadorned the-defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Id. If Plaintiff intends to allege several related claims, then he must set forth each claim in a separate paragraph in the same complaint. However, if the claims are not related to the same basic issue or incident, then each claim must be addressed in a separate complaint. In addressing an unrelated claim in a separate complaint, Plaintiff must complete a new civil rights complaint form for each unrelated claim. For instance, Plaintiff appears to allege claims for use of excessive force against Defendants Petruzzella and Schramm, correctional officers at Tomoka Correctional Institution, occurring on February 26, 2020, and an unrelated claim against Defendant Westfall, a doctor at Florida State Prison, for failure to provide medical care on July 21, 2020, through November 9, 2021. See Doc. 11 at 4- 5. These claims are not related to the same issue or incident and should not be asserted in the same complaint.¹ Plaintiff, therefore, should raise these claims in separate complaints, and the Clerk of the Court will then assign a new case number for the separate complaint and inform Plaintiff of the new case number. Of course, Plaintiff should file an amended complaint in this action by placing the case number in this action on a civil rights complaint form and choosing one of the claims to proceed with in this action. Plaintiff may at any time request more civil rights complaint forms for those unrelated claims.

Plaintiff must list all pertinent previous lawsuits under the section VIII of the complaint, including any cases that have been dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. If

DANIEL C. IRICK

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE