Case: 16-16474 Date Filed: 10/23/2018 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-16474
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 2:15-cv-00365-SPC-CM
EDWARD J. JABLONSKI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
THE TRAVELERS COMPANIES, INC.,
Defendant - Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(October 23, 2018)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Edward J. Jablonski, proceeding pro se, appeals the denial of two Rule 60(b)
motions to reopen his action against The Travelers Companies, Inc., as well as an
Case: 16-16474 Date Filed: 10/23/2018 Page: 2 of 2
order striking two complaints he filed after the District Court dismissed his second
amended complaint with prejudice and entered final judgment.
We read appellate briefs filed by pro se litigants liberally. Timson v.
Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008). Even so, we may not construct
arguments where none exist, Cofield v. Ala. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 936 F.2d 512,
514 n.2 (11th Cir. 1991), and generally will not consider issues that the appellant
does not include in his initial brief. Timson, 518 F.3d at 874.
Mr. Jablonski’s complaints in the district court and his initial brief on appeal
allege unspecified frauds by Travelers. His brief also indicates he has previously
experienced an aneurysm and may suffer from aphasia and related impairments.
His brief expresses stress and worry because of ongoing litigation, as well as fear
of suffering another aneurysm.
The court sympathizes with Mr. Jablonski’s circumstances, which clearly
make litigating on his own behalf difficult. However, we cannot discern any
argument from his brief for why the district court erred by denying his post-
judgment motions. See Timson, 518 F.3d at 874. We therefore affirm.
AFFIRMED.
2