Fleming v. Allen

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

MICHAEL-ZAHIR DAVID

FLEMING, Case No. 2:25-cv-588-JLB-KCD

Plaintiff,

v.

OFFICER TRISTIN ALLEN, BADGE J/116; OFFICER TIMOTHY HERRERA, BADGE G/2673; SERGEANT FOSTER, BADGE 1267; SHERIFF KEVIN RAMBOSK, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY; AND COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE,

Defendants, /

ORDER Plaintiff Michael-Zahir David Fleming moves the Court to reconsider its decision denying his request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 5.) According to Plaintiff, he has additional evidence that shows he cannot pay the filing fee. (Id.) The motion is DENIED for two reasons. First, “a party may not employ a motion for reconsideration as a vehicle to present new arguments or evidence that should have been raised earlier, introduce novel legal theories, or repackage familiar arguments to test whether the Court will change its mind.” Hays v. Page Perry, LLC, 92 F. Supp. 3d 1315, 1319 (N.D. Ga. 2015). Second, Plaintiffs request is unnecessary. The IFP motion was denied without prejudice, meaning Plaintiff is free to file a new motion and include the additional facts he now offers. ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on July 29, 2025.

or on —

* Keele C. Dudek United States Magistrate Judge