Case Explained: Non-Argument Calendar MICHELLE MAUPIN v. SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY MARIA ZABALA in her official and individual capacity CARMINE MOLINA BRENDA SWAIN in her official and individual capacity PIERRE EDOUARD in his official and individual capacity, et al RASHIMA BYNUM, et al USCA11 Case: 25-12982 Document: 40-1 Date Filed: 08/05/2026 Page: 1 of 10 2

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-08-05 Docket: 1:23-cv-21392-RNS The eleventh-circuit vacated the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of Michelle Maupin’s federal employment discrimination and retaliation claims under Title VII, the ADA, and § 1983, and remanded the case for further proceedings. The court held that the district court abused its discretion in imposing the sanction of dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The court applied the standard requiring a finding of “a clear pattern of delay or willful contempt” and a determination that “lesser sanctions would not suffice” before dismissing a case with prejudice. The appellate panel concluded that Maupin’s conduct amounted to simple negligence or isolated mistakes rather than willful contumacious conduct, noting her pro se status, the short three-day window provided for compliance with the ultimatum, and the fact that she had already filed the operative Third Amended Complaint which was available on the docket. Furthermore, the court found the district court failed to explain why no lesser sanction would serve the interests of justice, as the failure to re-file the pleading did not prejudice the defendants or frustrate review of the claims. The court also declined to address Maupin’s appeal regarding the denial of her Rule 60(b) motion to reopen the judgment because the underlying dismissal was vacated. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.