LeBlanc v. NH State Prison, Warden et al
ORDER DIRECTING PRO SE PLAINTIFF to Amend his Complaint. Failure to amend the complaint as directed, within thirty (30) days of the date of this order, will result in this courts recommendation that the complaint be dismissed re: 1 Complaint. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya McCafferty.(cmp)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Daniel J. LeBlanc, Sr.
Civil No. 12-cv-84-JL
Warden, New Hampshire
State Prison, et al.
O R D E R
The complaint (doc. no. 1) filed by pro se plaintiff Daniel
LeBlanc (“LeBlanc”) is before the court for preliminary review.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a); United States District Court District
of New Hampshire Local Rule (“LR”) 4.3(d)(2).
In a Report and
Recommendation issued simultaneously herewith, the court finds
the complaint alleges sufficient facts to state an Eighth
Amendment claim and a negligence claim for the violation of
LeBlanc’s right to be protected from harm, but has failed to
allege with sufficient particularity how the named defendants
Accordingly, to state a plausible claim for a
violation of LeBlanc’s right to be protected from harm, LeBlanc
must amend his complaint to allege what each defendant did that
reflects deliberate indifference to his right to be protected
LeBlanc is granted leave to amend his complaint as follows:
(1) LeBlanc must identify the NHSP official(s) that he
alleges is/are responsible for failing to protect him;
(2) LeBlanc must state with specificity what each defendant
did or failed to do that caused his rights to be violated; and
(3) LeBlanc must assert facts that demonstrate that each
defendant acted with deliberate indifference, including facts
(a) that the defendant was actually aware of specific
facts from which he or she could infer the existence of a
significant risk of substantial harm to LeBlanc, and (b) how
each defendant failed to reasonably respond to that risk to
protect LeBlanc from harm.
Failure to amend the complaint as directed, within thirty
(30) days of the date of this order, will result in this court’s
recommendation that the complaint be dismissed for failure to
state a claim upon which relief might be granted.
United States Magistrate Judge
June 21, 2012
Daniel LeBlanc, pro se
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.