Anthony Mills v. Arlene Bluth, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION ANTHONY MILLS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:26-CV-69 (MTT) ) ARLENE BLUTH, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________ ) ORDER On February 25, 2026, plaintiff Anthony Mills, proceeding pro se, filed his complaint. ECF 1. That same day, he moved to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF 2. For the reasons stated, Mills’ motion to proceed IFP (ECF 2) is GRANTED. However, Mills’ complaint lacks important factual allegations that Mills may have omitted because of his pro se status. Thus, the Court…