Opinion
6:19-cv-2313-WWB-LHP
12-13-2022
LEZA S. TELLAM, Plaintiff, v. ALEXANDRA KALMAN, WILLIAM HELLER and MICHAEL MARDER, Defendants
ORDER
LESLIE HOFFMAN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motions filed herein:
MOTION: NOTICE REGARDING TYPOGRAPHICAL ISSUES AND MOTION TO UPDATE CASE TITLE (Doc. No. 79)
FILED: November 8, 2022
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED.
MOTION: SECOND CORRECTION TO UPDATE TO CASE FILE (Doc. No. 80)
FILED: November 15, 20221
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED.|
Before the undersigned are two motions filed by Plaintiff, who appears pro se: “Notice Regarding Typographical Issues and Motion to Update Case Title,” and “Second Correction to Update to Case File.” Doc. Nos. 79, 80. Upon review, both motions are DENIED because Plaintiff's case was dismissed without prejudice and closed on July 20, 2020. Doc. No. 69. Even if the Court were to consider the motions - and Plaintiff has provided no legal authority authorizing the Court to consider motions in a closed case - the motions fail to comply with the Local Rules, including Local Rules 1.08, 3.01(a), and 3.01(g). See also Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989) (stating that pro se litigants are “subject to the relevant law and rules of court, including the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”). Moreover, insofar as Plaintiff is attempting to update her address on the Court's docket, see Doc. No. 79, at 2, the undersigned notes that the same address reflected in the November 7, 2022 filing (Doc. No. 78) is also reflected for Plaintiff on the public docket.
DONE and ORDERED 2