[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 15-15581

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 0:15-cv-62421-MGC

WILLIAM H. JONES, JR., 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 versus

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, 

Division of Retirement, 

 Defendant-Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(January 27, 2017)

Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 15-15581 Date Filed: 01/27/2017 Page: 1 of 5 
2

Plaintiff William Jones, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against 

Defendant State of Florida, Department of Management Services, Division of 

Retirement. The district court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice 

for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Jones appeals that dismissal. After careful review, we affirm. 

I. BACKGROUND

In 2015, Plaintiff filed a handwritten complaint against Defendant. Though 

the complaint is disjointed and confusing, Plaintiff appears to challenge the will 

and retirement beneficiary distribution of his deceased spouse, Maxine Brown. 

Plaintiff attached several documents to his complaint, including documents 

pertaining to Defendant’s denial of his claim challenging his wife’s beneficiary 

distribution, as well as documents related to his wife’s immigration status. 

Plaintiff also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 

The district court sua sponte denied without prejudice Plaintiff’s motion to 

proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the complaint without prejudice for 

failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The district court determined 

that, even construing the complaint liberally, it failed to meet the pleading standard 

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, as it did not provide any factual 

allegations pertaining to the relief sought or put Defendant on notice about the 

cause of action Plaintiff intended to pursue. 

Case: 15-15581 Date Filed: 01/27/2017 Page: 2 of 5 
3

II. DISCUSSION

We review de novo the district court’s dismissal of a complaint for failure to 

state a claim, using the same standards that govern Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

12(b)(6) dismissals. Leal v. Ga. Dep’t of Corr., 254 F.3d 1276, 1278 (11th Cir. 

2001). Section 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) provides that a district court shall dismiss a case 

proceeding in forma pauperis at any time if it determines that the action fails to 

state a claim on which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). To 

survive dismissal for failure to state a claim, “a complaint must contain sufficient 

factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its 

face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) further provides that in order to state a 

claim for relief, a pleading must contain: 

(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s 

jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim 

needs no new jurisdictional support;

(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 

pleader is entitled to relief; and

(3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in 

the alternative or different types of relief. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). “The point is to give the defendant fair notice of what the 

claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Harrison v. Benchmark Elecs. 

Huntsville, Inc., 593 F.3d 1206, 1214 (11th Cir. 2010) (quotations omitted). 

Case: 15-15581 Date Filed: 01/27/2017 Page: 3 of 5 
4

In his appellate brief, Plaintiff does not raise any arguments pertaining to the 

district court’s dismissal of his complaint for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff’s 

brief instead consists of a compilation of immigration decisions and other 

documents related to his wife’s last will and testament and her beneficiary 

designation. Plaintiff has therefore abandoned any arguments he may have had 

challenging the district court’s dismissal. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 

874 (11th Cir. 2008) (“While we read briefs filed by pro se litigants liberally, 

issues not briefed on appeal by a pro se litigant are deemed abandoned.” (citation 

omitted)). 

Nevertheless, even if we concluded that Plaintiff had not abandoned his 

challenge to the district court’s dismissal of his complaint, the district court did not 

err by dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim. Even construing 

Plaintiff’s complaint liberally, it fails to comply with Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 8. Indeed, Plaintiff does not state a basis for federal jurisdiction, nor is 

it clear what causes of action Plaintiff is asserting against Defendant or what relief 

Plaintiff seeks. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). 

Further, the district court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice 

and provided him the opportunity to amend his complaint to properly state a claim. 

See Bryant v. Dupree, 252 F.3d 1161, 1163 (11th Cir. 2001) (“Generally, where a 

more carefully drafted complaint might state a claim, a plaintiff must be given at 

Case: 15-15581 Date Filed: 01/27/2017 Page: 4 of 5 
5

least one chance to amend the complaint before the district court dismisses the 

action with prejudice.” (quotations omitted)). Plaintiff did not do so, and instead 

filed an appeal with this Court. Accordingly, the district court did not err by 

dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim. 

AFFIRMED. 

Case: 15-15581 Date Filed: 01/27/2017 Page: 5 of 5