Temesgen Abdissa v. Merck Corporate
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:15-cv-00393-BO. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: T. Abdissa. [15-2186]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
TEMESGEN TESHOME ABDISSA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:15-cv-00393-BO)
February 29, 2016
March 3, 2016
Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Temesgen Teshome Abdissa, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Temesgen Teshome Abdissa appeals the district court’s order
granting his motion to proceed in forma pauperis and summarily
discriminated against him in violation of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2012 &
district court’s order and remand for further proceedings.
Once construed liberally, however, a federal court must
determines that “the action . . . is frivolous or malicious[,]
. . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted[,]
or . . . seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
Nagy v. FMC Butner, 376 F.3d 252, 256–57 (4th Cir.
It does not appear beyond doubt that Abdissa’s complaint
“lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); McLean v. United States, 566
F.3d 391, 399 (4th Cir. 2009) (“Examples of frivolous claims
Pg: 3 of 3
delusional, or wholly fanciful as to be simply unbelievable.”
(internal quotation marks and citations omitted)).
at the Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) stage, a complaint may proceed
“even if it strikes a savvy judge that actual proof of [the
alleged] facts is improbable, and that a recovery is very remote
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556
(2007) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Because the district
opportunity to clarify his claims, see Coleman v. Peyton, 340
F.2d 603, 604 (4th Cir. 1965) (per curiam) (holding that, if pro
should be given opportunity to particularize allegations), we
vacate the district court’s order dismissing Abdissa’s complaint
as frivolous and remand to permit Abdissa to amend his complaint
and for further proceedings.
We express no opinion as to the
viability of Abdissa’s underlying claims.
We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?