CHAMBERS v. DIXON et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
KEION NATHANIEL CHAMBERS,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 4:26-cv-52-AW-MJF
RICKY DIXON, et al.,
Defendants.
_______________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Having carefully considered the matter, I now adopt the amended report and
recommendation (ECF No. 10) and incorporate it into this order. I have considered
de novo the issues raised in Plaintiff’s objections (ECF No. 12).
As the magistrate judge explains, Plaintiff did not fully and accurately
disclose his prior litigation on the court’s required form. Under these circumstances,
I agree with the magistrate judge that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate. See
McNair v. Johnson, 143 F.4th 1301, 1307-08 (11th Cir. 2025) (affirming dismissal
in similar circumstances).
In his objections, Plaintiff explains he lacked the details because he did not
have all his files. But even if he lacked details of his missing case, he could have
disclosed what he did know. Allowing pro se litigants to avoid sanction by saying
they misremembered would undermine the purpose of the rule.
Case 4:26-cv-00052-AW-MJF Document 13 Filed 03/16/26 Page 1 of 2

2
I have considered the fact that the complaint alleges conduct in 2025, meaning
there is no indication that the claims will be time barred. Thus, there is no indication
that this dismissal without prejudice will act in effect as a dismissal with prejudice.
Plaintiff may file a new lawsuit that complies with the rules.
The clerk will enter a judgment that says, “This case is dismissed without
prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s local rules and
failure to disclose litigation history.” The clerk will then close the file.
SO ORDERED on March 16, 2026.
s/ Allen Winsor
Chief United States District Judge
Case 4:26-cv-00052-AW-MJF Document 13 Filed 03/16/26 Page 2 of 2