UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION

CHARLES J. DAVIS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 5:20-cv-80-TKW/MJF

R. TAYLOR, et al.,

Defendants. / ORDER This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 99). Plaintiff filed a “Motion to Object” (Doc. 102), which the Court construes as an objection to the Report and Recommendation. The Court reviewed the issues raised in the objection de novo as required by

(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Based on that review, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s determination that this case should be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b)(1) based on Plaintiff’s failure to fully disclose his litigation history. The Court did not overlook Plaintiff’s belated efforts to disclose his litigation history, see Docs. 95, 97, but those efforts are too little too late. See Hood v. Tompkins,

(11th Cir. 2006) (“[T]he district court was correct to conclude that to allow [the plaintiff] to then acknowledge what he should Merritt v. Dep't of Corr.,

, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2020) (rejecting inmate’s argument that he should be allowed to amend his complaint to

disclose his litigation history where his failure to do so was allegedly based on an “honest mistake” because that “would amount to no penalty ... and would not serve as a deterrent to Plaintiff and others from falsely answering the questions on the civil

rights complaint form”). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.

2. Plaintiff’s motion to supplement the record (Doc. 95) and motion to reattach prior civil litigation history (Doc. 97) are DENIED. 3. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 85) is GRANTED insofar as it

sought dismissal of the third amended complaint based on Plaintiff’s failure to fully disclose his litigation history,1 and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice on that basis under 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b)(1). 4. All other pending motions are DENIED as moot.

5. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close the case file. Page 3 of 3 DONE and ORDERED this 25th day of July, 2022.

7 i haf W bv pe T. KENT WETHERELL, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE