UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION

VONDALL LAMAR PONDER,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 5:25-cv-80-SDM-PRL

MARION COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD and FOREST HIGH SCHOOL,

Defendants.

ORDER The Plaintiff, Vondall Lamar Ponder, who is proceeding pro se, filed this action against Defendants Marion County School Board and Forest High School (Doc. 1). Plaintiff seeks to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2). For the reasons explained below, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis will be taken under advisement, and, in an abundance of caution, Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to amend the complaint. I. Legal Standards An individual may be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis if he declares in an affidavit that he is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.

(a)(1). However, before a plaintiff is permitted to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court is obligated to review the complaint to determine whether it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted[,] or ... seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

§ 1915(e)(2). If the complaint is deficient, the Court is required to dismiss the suit sua sponte. Id. II. Discussion As best can be discerned from the sparce, vague, and incomprehensible allegations of the complaint, Plaintiff has unspecified grievances against the Defendants arising from his apparent attendance at Forest High School in the early 1990s. Plaintiff states that he was given

“instructions,” and discovered an informant “like he wanted me to.” (Doc. 1 at 5). Plaintiff’s allegations also reference “the bug system,” and state that “three people with a sign of the bug system attended Forest High School.” (Doc. 1 at 5). Plaintiff also references relatives of judicial officers in Marion County whom Plaintiff contends had “a sign of the bug system.” (Doc. 1 at 5). Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) seeks unspecified damages and relief, as Plaintiff contends, “my sum of money is not in numbers it is in words.” (Doc. 1 at 4). Despite checking a box indicating diversity of citizenship jurisdiction, Plaintiff’s allegations are vague, conclusory, non-specific, and lack well-pled facts. In short, Plaintiff’s allegations are far from sufficient to state a claim. Plaintiff’s complaint does not meet the

pleading requirements set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff’s complaint does not contain a short plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, as required by Rule 8. Although Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he is “still required to conform to procedural rules, and the court is not required to rewrite a deficient pleading.” Washington v. Dept. of Children and Families,

, 327 (11th Cir. 2007). Moreover, and significantly, Plaintiff has not alleged any viable basis for claims under federal law or otherwise. The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Out of an abundance of caution, the Court will provide Plaintiff with an opportunity to file an amended complaint to clarify the bases for his claim. Plaintiff must provide the Court with sufficient information and in a coherent manner so that it can perform the review required under § 1915. The amended complaint must clearly state the legal theory or theories upon which Plaintiff seeks relief and explain with factual allegations how defendant(s) are responsible. Plaintiff should carefully consider whether he can allege a claim in good faith because pursuing frivolous claims could lead to the imposition of sanctions.

III. Conclusion Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT, and Plaintiff shall have until April 25, 2025, to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must comply with all pleading requirements contained in Rules 8, 9, 10, and 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as well as those contained in the Local Rules of the Middle District of Florida. Failure to comply with this Order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Local Rule 3.10. Further, Plaintiff is cautioned that despite proceeding pro se, he is required to comply

with this Court’s Local Rules, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Federal Rules of Evidence. Plaintiff may obtain a copy of the Local Rules from the Court’s website (http:w.flmd.uscourts.gov) or by visiting the Office of the Clerk of Court. Also, resources and information related to proceeding in court without a lawyer, including a handbook entitled Guide for Proceeding Without a Lawyer, can be located on the Court’s website (http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/pro_se/default.htm). Plaintiff should also consult the Middle District of Florida’s Discovery Handbook for a general discussion of this District’s discovery practices (see http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/civil-discovery-handbook). DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on March 24, 2025.

PHILIP R. LAMMENS United States Magistrate Judge Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties

_4-