PEPE v. PIVACHEK

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION

TIMOTHY PEPE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:25-cv-667-TKW-ZCB

JUDGE CYNTHIA PIVACHEK,

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 determinations that (1) this suit should be dismissed because it is based on Defendant’s acts and omissions in her judicial capacity for which she has absolute immunity from suit, and (2) dismissal should be “with prejudice” because any amendment would be futile.1

1 On the second point, the Court did not overlook the proposed amended complaint (Doc. 8) filed by Plaintiff with his objection. However, the conclusory allegation in that filing that Defendant “acted outside the bounds of [her] judicial authority” is insufficient to overcome her judicial immunity because the Court is “not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as

Page 1 of 2 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 with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. $1915(e)(2)(B)(i1) because Defendant is entitled to absolute judicial immunity from suit. 3. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close this case file. DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of May, 2025.

Tho Wl © ff

T. KENT WETHERELL, I UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

a factual allegation.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.”). Page 2 of 2