Opinion
8:21-cv-1245-CEH-CPT
06-11-2021
JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. NEW COLLEGE OF FLORIDA and NEW COLLEGE OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Defendants.
ORDER
CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter comes before the Court on the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, or Alternatively, Motion for More Definite Statement (Doc. 12). In the motion, Defendants state that Plaintiff has failed to comply with pre-suit requirements and thus Defendants are unable to respond to the allegations in the complaint. Because the motion does not comply with the Local Rules for the Middle District of Florida, the Court does not need a response before ruling on the motion. The Court, having considered the motion and being fully advised in the premises, will deny, without prejudice, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, or Alternatively, Motion for More Definite Statement for failure to comply with Local Rules 3.01(a) and (g).
Defendants argue the Complaint fails to include certain information required to comply with the pre-suit requirements of Fla. Stat. § 768.28(6), including Plaintiff's date of birth and social security number. To the extent such information is required, the Court directs the parties to the Administrative Procedures for Electronic Filing that may be found on the Court's website and which specifically require a lawyer to redact, as appropriate, personal data identifiers. See https://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/sites/flmd/files/documents/flmd-administrative-procedures-for-electronic-filing.pdf
A complete copy of the Local Rules for the United States District Court Middle District of Florida may be found on the Court's website. See https://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/sites/flmd/files/localrules/flmd-united-states-district-court-middle-district-of-florida-local-rules.pdf.
Defendants' motion to dismiss was filed in state court and does not comply with the local rules of this Court. Specifically, it does not include a memorandum of law as required by Rule 3.01(a) and does not include a certification of conferral as required by Rule 3.01(g). Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, or Alternatively, Motion for More Definite Statement (Doc. 12) is DENIED without prejudice for failing to comply with Local Rules 3.01(a) and 3.01(g).
2. Any amended motion curing the deficiencies identified herein must be filed within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS from the date of this order. If Defendants do not file such an amended motion within the time provided, Defendants must answer the complaint within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS from the date of this order.
DONE AND ORDERED.