Roy O. Daniels v. Theresa Barber and James Haigler

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION ROY O. DANIELS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:26-cv-2-TKW-MAF THERESA BARBER and JAMES HAIGLER Defendants. / ORDER This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) and Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. 5). The Court reviewed the issues raised in the objections de novo under 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 determination that this case should be dismissed under the “three strikes statute,” 28 U.S.C. §1915 (g).1 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1 Even if the case was not dismissed on this ground, it would be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because the complaint asserts constitutional violations under 42 U.S.C. §1983 against private individuals, not governmental employees acting under color of state law, and it is well established that “§1983 excludes from its reach merely private conduct, no matter how discriminatory or wrongful.” Focus on the Fam. v. Pinellas Suncoast Transit Auth., 344 F.3d 1263, 1277 (11th Cir. 2003). 1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order. 2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED, and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §1915 (g). 3. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close the case file. DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of February, 2026. fe T.KENT WETHERELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 2 of 2