UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

HAKIMAH JABBOR, Case No. 1:18-cv-95 Plaintiff, Dlott, J. Litkovitz, M.J. vs.

JAMES GRAHAM, ORDER Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion to amend erroneous pleadings pursuant to Rule 15 (Doc. 13). This case originated in 2018, when defendant removed to federal court plaintiffs’ state petition for a civil stalking protection order alleging that a federal judge “is avoiding having court, so I will not receive my property, he has consitantly [sic] use the courts to impede me serving him cease and desist orders.” (Doc. 1-3 at PAGEID 7). Because plaintiff’s initial petition was handwritten, her name was docketed as “Hakimah Jabbor” rather than “Hakimah Jabbar,” her correctly spelled legal name. Although she filed three motions during the pendency of this case, she did not address the spelling or misspelling of her name. (Docs. 5, 6, and 7). This case was dismissed on August 17, 2018. (Doc. 10). The dismissal was not appealed. On July 29, 2024,―almost six years after the case was closed―Jabbar filed the instant motion to amend erroneous pleadings pursuant to Rule 15. (Doc. 13). Jabbar is no stranger to federal litigation. See, e.g., Case Nos. 2:17-cr-158, 1:20-cv-245, 2:20-cv-775, 2:20-cv-948, and 2:20-cv-6406. She filed an identical motion to amend erroneous pleadings pursuant to Rule 15 in Deandre Forrest v. United States of America, No. 2:17-cr-158. That motion also sought to correct the spelling of her last name from “Jabbor” to “Jabbar.” The District Judge in that case denied the motion as moot. (Doc. 225 in Case No. 2:17-cr-158). Other courts have similarly declined to change a party’s name after a case has closed. See, e.g., Johnson v. Thompson, No. 3:21-cv-414,

, at *2 (W.D. Ky. June 21, 2024) (declining “to change this closed case’s caption” “because there is no need to do so.” “A contrary rule would require the captions of long inactive, closed cases (like this one) to be updated anytime a party’s legal name is changed. ... Such a rule would be impractical and serve no meaningful purpose.”). This Court agrees. Changing the spelling of Jabbar’s name in the case caption six years after the case closed is unnecessary and impractical. Therefore, plaintiff's motion (Doc. 13) is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 9/27/2024 Hern K Kethonh- Karen L. Litkovitz United States Magistrate Judge