PEPE v. CONFREDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION THOMAS PEPE, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 3:25-cv-730-TKW-HTC RALPH CONFREDA, Defendant. / ORDER This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6) and Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. 7). The Court reviewed the issues raised in the objection de novo as required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), and based on that review, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s determination that this case should be dismissed.

The Court did not overlook Plaintiff’s argument that this case should be transferred to the Middle District rather than being dismissed. However, under 28 U.S.C. §1406(a), dismissal is the presumptive disposition of a case filed in the wrong district unless transfer is “in the interest of justice.” Here, as explained by the magistrate judge, transferring the case would not be in the interest of justice because it fails to state a plausible claim for relief.

Page 1 of 3 The Court also did not overlook Plaintiff’s argument that he should be granted leave to amend the complaint. However, the Court sees no reason to allow Plaintiff to file an amended complaint in this case because the case is indisputably filed in the wrong district. Thus, if Plaintiff believes that he can cure the deficiencies in the complaint to assert plausible claims against Defendant, he should do so by filing a new complaint in the Middle District (or appropriate state court) rather than an amended complaint in this Court.

Finally, the Court did not overlook that Plaintiff is pro se and that he claims to be a “disabled elderly adult.” However, that does not preclude the Court from dismissing a legally sufficient complaint because all parties (represented or not) are required to comply with the applicable pleading rules. See Arrington v. Wells Fargo, 842 F. App’x 307, 311 (11th Cir. 2020).

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

2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §1406(a).

3. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.

4. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close the case file.

Page 2 of 3 DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of June, 2025.

7. bo T. KENT WETHERELL, I UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 3 of 3