Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-13-13367/USCOURTS-ca11-13-13367-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Nellie Annette Brown
Appellant
Department of Health, Government Agency
Appellee

Document Text:

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 13-13367

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 3:12-cv-00617-HLA-TEM

NELLIE ANNETTE BROWN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

PUTNAM COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HEALTHY FAMILIES, et al.,

Defendants,

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT AGENCY, 

Defendant-Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(January 2, 2014)

Before HULL, MARCUS and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

USCA11 Case: 13-13367 Date Filed: 01/02/2014 Page: 1 of 2
2

Nellie Brown appeals pro se the dismissal of her third amended complaint. 

The district court dismissed Brown’s complaint for failure to perfect service of 

process, and Brown does not challenge that ruling. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 

F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008). The district court instructed Brown how to perfect 

service of process and what party to name as the proper defendant, gave her three 

opportunities to comply with those instructions, and warned her that the failure to 

perfect service of her third amended complaint would result in dismissal.

Although we treat pro se litigants like Brown leniently, “we nevertheless ... 

require[ ] them to conform to procedural rules.” Albra v. Advan, Inc., 490 F.3d 

826, 829 (11th Cir. 2007) (quoting Loren v. Sasser, 309 F.3d 1296, 1304 (11th Cir.

2002)).

We AFFIRM the dismissal of Brown’s third amended complaint.

USCA11 Case: 13-13367 Date Filed: 01/02/2014 Page: 2 of 2