Patterson v. Midland Mortgage Co

Filing 2

ORDER directing Plaintiff to amend the complaint not later than 7/6/2010 or complaint will be dismissed. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 6/22/2010. (nbp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA M ACON DIVISION CARM EN PATTERSON, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : : M IDLAND MORTGAGE CO., : : Defendant. : _________________________________ :
ORDER

Civil Action No. 5:10-CV-242 (HL)

P laintiff Carmen Patterson filed a pro se complaint in this Court on June 18, 2010 (Doc. 1). Her complaint is m os tly gibberish and unintelligible. Although the c om plaint cites truth in lending and contract law violations, there are no facts pres ented from which the Court can discern a cause of action. The Defendant has not been served, but Plaintiff has paid the filing fee and does not seek to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"). If Plaintiff was proceeding IFP then the Court would screen her complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) and dis m is s it for failure to state a claim. Because Plaintiff is not proceeding IFP, the Court may not dismiss her case sua sponte unless it provides plaintiff with notice of its intent to dismiss the complaint and an opportunity to respond. Jefferson

Fourteenth Assocs. v. W om etc o de Puerto Rico, Inc., 695 F.2d 524, 527 (11th Cir. 1983); Morris v. Bush, 2008 W L 4525016, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 6, 2008). In this case the Court intends to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint, but before doing

so, the Court will allow Plaintiff the opportunity to amend her complaint to describe the actions the Defendant allegedly took, how those actions harmed her, and what s tatutes or law she seeks relief under.1 Her amended complaint must be filed no

later than July 6, 2010. If she fails to amend her complaint to state a claim, then the c om plaint will be dismissed. SO ORDERED, this the 22nd day of June, 2010. s/ Hugh Lawson HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE lm c

A complaint must "contain either direct or inferential allegations respecting all the material elements [of a claim]." Fin. Sec. Assur., Inc. v. Stephen, Inc., 500 F.3d 1276, 1282-83 (11th Cir. 2007) (quotations and citations omitted). The fac tual allegations in the complaint must also "raise a right to relief above the s pec ulative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 500 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965, 167 l.Ed.2d 929 (2007). This means the plaintiff must do more than us e labels and conclusions, and he must include more than a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action. Id.
1

2