Sater v. No Named Defendant
Filing
3
ORDER Directing Plaintiff to Cure Deficiencies and to File Complaint that Complies with Rule 8, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 7/18/2014. (slibi, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-01980-BNB
(The above civil action number must appear on all future papers
sent to the Court in this action. Failure to include this number
may result in a delay in the consideration of your claims.)
WAYNE ALLEN SATER,
Plaintiff,
v.
[NO NAMED DEFENDANT],
Defendant.
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO CURE DEFICIENCIES AND
TO FILE COMPLAINT THAT COMPLIES WITH RULE 8
Plaintiff, Wayne Allen Sater, is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado
Department of Corrections at the Crowley County Correctional Facility in Olney Springs,
Colorado. Mr. Sater, acting pro se, attempted to initiate this action on July 16, 2014, by
filing with the Court a document titled “Order for Negotiable Withdrawal Ticket” (ECF
No. 1) that is unintelligible. The Court has opened this case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
because Mr. Sater is a state prisoner and does not appear to be asserting a challenge
to the fact or duration of his conviction or sentence. As part of the Court’s review
pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1(b), the Court has determined that the document is
deficient as described in this order. Plaintiff will be directed to cure the following if he
wishes to pursue any claims in this Court in this action. Any papers that Plaintiff files in
response to this order must include the civil action number on this order.
28 U.S.C. § 1915 Motion and Affidavit:
is not submitted (must use and complete all pages of the Court’s current
(1)
X
form revised 10/01/12 with Authorization and Certificate of Prison Official)
is missing affidavit
(2)
(3)
X
is missing certified copy of prisoner's trust fund statement for the 6-month
period immediately preceding this filing
is missing certificate showing current balance in prison account
(4)
(5)
is missing required financial information
(6)
is missing an original signature by the prisoner
(7)
is not on proper form
(8)
names in caption do not match names in caption of complaint, petition or
habeas application
(9)
An original and a copy have not been received by the Court.
Only an original has been received.
other: Plaintiff may pay $400.00 (the $350.00 filing fee plus a $50.00
(10)
X
administrative fee) in lieu of filing a § 1915 Motion and Affidavit and a
certified copy of his six months’ trust fund statement.
Complaint, Petition or Application:
(11)
X
is not submitted
is not on proper form
(12)
(13)
is missing an original signature by the prisoner
(14)
is missing page nos.
(15)
uses et al. instead of listing all parties in caption
(16)
names in caption do not match names in text
addresses must be provided for all defendants/respondents in “Section A.
(17)
Parties” of complaint, petition or habeas application
(18)
other:
The Prisoner Complaint Plaintiff files must comply with the pleading requirements
of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The twin purposes of a complaint are
to give the opposing parties fair notice of the basis for the claims against them so that
they may respond and to allow the court to conclude that the allegations, if proven,
show that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. See Monument Builders of Greater Kansas
City, Inc. v. American Cemetery Ass’n of Kansas, 891 F.2d 1473, 1480 (10th Cir. 1989).
The requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 are designed to meet these purposes. See TV
Communications Network, Inc. v. ESPN, Inc., 767 F. Supp. 1062, 1069 (D. Colo. 1991),
2
aff’d, 964 F.2d 1022 (10th Cir. 1992). Specifically, Rule 8(a) provides that a complaint
"must contain (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, .
. . (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought." The philosophy of Rule 8(a) is reinforced
by Rule 8(d)(1), which provides that "[e]ach allegation must be simple, concise, and
direct." Taken together, Rules 8(a) and (d)(1) underscore the emphasis placed on
clarity and brevity by the federal pleading rules. Prolix, vague, or unintelligible pleadings
violate Rule 8.
Claims must be presented clearly and concisely in a manageable format that
allows a court and a defendant to know what claims are being asserted and to be able
to respond to those claims. New Home Appliance Ctr., Inc., v. Thompson, 250 F.2d
881, 883 (10th Cir. 1957). For the purposes of Rule 8(a), "[i]t is sufficient, and indeed all
that is permissible, if the complaint concisely states facts upon which relief can be
granted upon any legally sustainable basis." Id.
In order to state a claim in federal court, Mr. Sater "must explain what each
defendant did to him or her; when the defendant did it; how the defendant’s action
harmed him or her; and, what specific legal right the plaintiff believes the defendant
violated." Nasious v. Two Unknown B.I.C.E. Agents, 492 F.3d 1158, 1163 (10th Cir.
2007).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff, Wayne Allen Sater, cure the deficiencies designated
above within thirty (30) days from the date of this order. Any papers that Plaintiff
files in response to this order must include the civil action number on this order. It is
3
FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall obtain the Court-approved forms for
filing a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915 and a Prisoner Complaint, along with the applicable instructions, at
www.cod.uscourts.gov, and shall use those forms in curing the designated deficiencies
and in filing a Prisoner Complaint that complies with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that, if Plaintiff fails to cure the designated deficiencies
and file a Prisoner Complaint within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, this
action will be dismissed without further notice.
DATED July 18, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge
4
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?