Emmanuel Boateng v. Fairfax Police Department

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:12-cv-00055-TSE-TRJ. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998973130]. Mailed to: Emmanuel Boateng. [12-1653]

Appeal: 12-1653

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/02/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1653

EMMANUEL KWAME BOATENG,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
FAIRFAX POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:12-cv-00055-TSE-TRJ)

Submitted:

September 27, 2012

Decided:

November 2, 2012

Before KING and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Emmanuel Kwame Boateng, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Rogers
Jacewicz, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Fairfax, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-1653

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/02/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Emmanuel
order

dismissing

prejudice.

Kwame
his

Boateng

42

U.S.C.

appeals
§ 1983

the

district

(2006)

court’s

complaint

with

Upon our review, we affirm.
In the district court, the defendant moved to dismiss

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a
claim.

Boateng was given notice, at his address of record, of a

hearing on the motion to dismiss, and was provided proper notice
pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975).
However, he did not appear at the hearing.

The district court

reviewed the record and concluded that Boateng failed to state a
claim.

The court found, however, that Boateng could potentially

state a claim if given the opportunity to re-plead against the
actual officers involved in the arrest, none of whom were named
as party defendants.
could

plead

Accordingly,

Further, the court observed that Boateng

additional

facts

the

encouraged

court

supporting
Boateng

municipal
to

liability.

obtain

counsel.

The court granted the motion to dismiss without prejudice, and
granted Boateng leave to file an amended complaint no later than
5:00 p.m. Wednesday March 21, 2012.

The court expressly stated

that if Boateng failed to file an amended complaint on or before
that

time,

an

order

would

issue

dismissing

his

action

prejudice and placing the matter among the ended causes.

2

with

Appeal: 12-1653

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/02/2012

Pg: 3 of 3

On March 22, 2012, the district court dismissed the
complaint with prejudice because Boateng did not file an amended
complaint.

Accordingly, as Boateng was given ample notice and

opportunity

to

dismissal

of

amend

his

Fairfax

Police

Mar. 22,

and

materials

legal
before

complaint,

complaint

2012).

facts

his

Dep’t,
We

with

No.

we

affirm

prejudice.

See

with

oral

argument

contentions

are

adequately

the

and

argument

Boateng

v.

(E.D.

Va.
the

presented

would

court’s

because

1:12-cv-00055-TSE-TRJ

dispense

court

the

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.
AFFIRMED

3