LADD v. JONES

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
ANTHONY SAM LADD,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 3:26-cv-538-AW-ZCB
DIQUAN JONES,
Defendant.
_______________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, a pro se prisoner, sued his son. He claims he deposited a disability
check in his son’s account with the expectation that his son would return the funds.
ECF No. 1. The complaint is on a form civil rights complaint for pro se prisoner
litigants. Id. at 1. The form references § 1983 and §§ 1331 and 1346, and Plaintiff
added a passing reference to the ADA. But the complaint, fairly read, presents no
federal claim.
The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation concluding the
court should dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff filed
no objection. I now adopt the report and recommendation and incorporate it into this
order.
As the magistrate judge notes, Plaintiff had the burden of establishing
jurisdiction. And despite the form’s reference to federal statutes and Plaintiff’s
passing reference to the ADA, there is no federal claim here. Cf. Rubinstein v.
Case 3:26-cv-00538-AW-ZCB Document 8 Filed 04/10/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Yehuda, 38 F.4th 982, 993 (11th Cir. 2022) (“Not every complaint alleging a federal
claim invokes federal question jurisdiction.”). There is also no diversity.
In light of this, Plaintiff has not met his burden of demonstrating jurisdiction.
The clerk will enter a judgment that says, “This case is dismissed without prejudice
based on lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.” The clerk will then close the file.
SO ORDERED on April 10, 2026.
s/ Allen Winsor
Chief United States District Judge
Case 3:26-cv-00538-AW-ZCB Document 8 Filed 04/10/26 Page 2 of 2