Taylor v. City of Mobile Police Department

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MONICA TAYLOR, 	)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-00328-KD-N
)
CITY OF MOBILE POLICE 	)
DEPARTMENT,1 	)
Defendant. 	)
ORDER
On August 28, 2023, the City of Mobile (“the City”), claiming that it is a proper
defendant to this action rather than the “City of Mobile Police Department,”
removed this civil action to this Court from Alabama state court under 28 U.S.C. §
1441(a) (“Except as otherwise expressly provided by Act of Congress, any civil action
brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have
original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the
district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place
where such action is pending.”), alleging subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1331 (“The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising
under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”) based on the
Plaintiff’s claims that certain of her federal constitutional rights were violated (see
1 Though the Defendant claims that it should be referred to as the “City of Mobile,”
the Court will at present title this case based on how the Defendant is named in the
title of the operative complaint (Doc. 1-1, PageID.8-9). The Clerk of Court is
DIRECTED to change the title of this case on the docket to reflect the title used in
this order.
Case 1:23-cv-00328-KD-N Doc# 5 Filed 09/12/23 Page 1 of 5 PageID#
<pageID>

Doc. 1-1, PageID.8).
On September 8, 2023, the City filed a motion to dismiss the complaint under
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(5) (“insufficient service of process”) and
12(b)(6) (“failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted”), or alternatively
for a more definite statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e). (Doc. 4).2
The assigned District Judge has referred said motion to the undersigned Magistrate
Judge for appropriate action under 28 U.S.C. § 636(a)-(b), Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72, and S.D. Ala. GenLR 72(a). See S.D. Ala. GenLR 72(b); (9/8/2023
electronic reference notation).
Upon due consideration, the following briefing schedule is set for said motion:
1. 	The 	Plaintiff, 	Monica 	Taylor—who 	is 	proceeding 	without 	counsel 	(pro
se)—must file and serve her brief in response to said motion, if any, no later
than SEPTEMBER 29, 2023.3
2 The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “apply to a civil action after it is removed
from a state court.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 81(c)(1).
3 This is also the deadline by which the Plaintiff may amend her complaint once as a
matter of course under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 15(a)(1) advisory committee’s note to 2009 amendment (stating that the current
version of Rule 15(a)(1) was enacted to “force the pleader to consider carefully and
promptly the wisdom of amending to meet the arguments in [a Rule 12(b), (e), or (f)]
motion[, as a] responsive amendment may avoid the need to decide the motion or
reduce the number of issues to be decided, and will expedite determination of issues
that otherwise might be raised seriatim”). If the Plaintiff chooses to timely amend
her complaint under Rule 15(a)(1)(B), she need not file a separate response to the
motion. See Pintando v. Miami-Dade Hous. Agency, 501 F.3d 1241, 1243 (11th Cir.
2007) (per curiam) (“As a general matter, ‘[a]n amended pleading supersedes the
former pleading; the original pleading is abandoned by the amendment, and is no
longer a part of the pleader's averments against his adversary.’” (quoting Dresdner
Case 1:23-cv-00328-KD-N Doc# 5 Filed 09/12/23 Page 2 of 5 PageID#
<pageID>

2. 	The City must file and serve its brief in reply to the Plaintiff’s response, if any,
no later than OCTOBER 9, 2023, after which the motion will be taken under
submission for consideration as to the appropriate disposition.
3. 	Except as permitted by the Court’s Local Rules, e.g., S.D. Ala. CivLR 7(f)(3),
no other briefing or submissions addressing the subject motion may be filed
without leave of the Court for good cause shown.
4. 	Should the Court determine that oral argument would be beneficial, a hearing
will be set by separate order. Otherwise, this motion is being submitted
without oral argument. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); S.D. Ala. CivLR 7(h). “Oral
argument requests must contain specific reasons why oral argument would be
helpful.” S.D. Ala. CivLR 7(h).
All briefing must comply with the requirements of General Local Rule 5(a)
and Civil Local Rule 7. However, courtesy copies of any brief or exhibits are not
required unless expressly requested by the Court.
NOTICE TO PRO SE PLAINTIFF
The Plaintiff is advised that “[a]ll persons proceeding pro se shall be bound by,
and must comply with, all Local Rules of this Court, as well as the Federal Rules of
Civil … Procedure, unless excused by Court order.” S.D. Ala. GenLR 83.5(a). See also
Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989) (“[O]nce a pro se IFP litigant is
Bank AG, Dresdner Bank AG in Hamburg v. M/V OLYMPIA VOYAGER, 463 F.3d
1210, 1215 (11th Cir. 2006) (citation and quotation omitted))); Fritz v. Standard Sec.
Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 676 F.2d 1356, 1358 (11th Cir. 1982) (“Under the Federal Rules,
an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint.”).
Case 1:23-cv-00328-KD-N Doc# 5 Filed 09/12/23 Page 3 of 5 PageID#
<pageID>

in court, he is subject to the relevant law and rules of court, including the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. These rules provide for sanctions for misconduct and for
failure to comply with court orders.”); United States v. Hung Thien Ly, 646 F.3d
1307, 1315 (11th Cir. 2011) (“A pro se [party] must follow the rules of procedure and
evidence and the district court has no duty to act as his lawyer…” (citation omitted)).
For instance, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) requires that any paper
filed with the Court be signed by a pro se party personally and provide that party’s
“address, e-mail address, and telephone number.” See also S.D. Ala. GenLR 5(a)(4)
(“For filings by pro se litigants, the unrepresented party shall personally sign each
document filed and shall include, directly beneath the signature line, his or her
name, address and telephone number.”). Unless and until the Plaintiff registers with
the Clerk of Court to electronically file with the Court, see Administrative Procedure
for Electronic Filing in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Alabama, 	§ 	III(B) 	(last 	revised 	2/1/2019)
(https://www.alsd.uscourts.gov/sites/alsd/files/AdminPro.pdf); Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(3),
the Plaintiff must handwrite his signature in order to satisfy Rule 11(a).4 “The court
must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after being
4 See Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 763–64, 121 S. Ct. 1801, 149 L. Ed. 2d
983 (2001) (“Becker maintains that typing one's name satisfies the signature
requirement and that his original notice of appeal, containing his name typed above
“(Counsel of Record),” met Civil Rule 11(a)’s instruction…[H]owever, we are not
disposed to extend the meaning of the word ‘signed,’ as that word appears in Civil
Rule 11(a), to permit typed names. As Rule 11(a) is now framed, we read the
requirement of a signature to indicate, as a signature requirement commonly does,
and as it did in John Hancock's day, a name handwritten (or a mark handplaced).”).
Case 1:23-cv-00328-KD-N Doc# 5 Filed 09/12/23 Page 4 of 5 PageID#
<pageID>

called to the attorney's or party's attention.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a).
Under this Court’s local rules, “[a]ny person proceeding pro se must, at all
times during the pendency of the action to which he or she is a party, keep the Clerk
informed of his or her current address and … must promptly notify the Clerk of any
change of address … Failure to comply with this Rule may result in sanction,
including 	dismissal 	of 	a 	pro 	se 	plaintiff’s 	action…” 	S.D. 	Ala. 	GenLR 	83.5(b).
Additionally, any “request for Court action must be presented by motion and may
not be presented by informal means such as a letter.” S.D. Ala. GenLR 7.5
DONE and ORDERED this the 12th day of September 2023.
/s/ Katherine P. Nelson
KATHERINE P. NELSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
5 The 	Court’s 	Local 	Rules 	and 	standing 	orders 	can 	be 	accessed 	at:
https://www.alsd.uscourts.gov/court-info/local-rules-and-orders
Case 1:23-cv-00328-KD-N Doc# 5 Filed 09/12/23 Page 5 of 5 PageID#
<pageID>