Jones

Filing 41

RULING granting 35 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying 40 MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental More Definite Statement LPSC, LDEQ, and LDHH filed by Joseph Jones.. Signed by Judge James J. Brady on 7/25/2011. (CMM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
JOSEPH L. JONES
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NO. 10-525
LOUISIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
ET AL.
RULING
This matter is before the Court on a motion (doc. 35) to dismiss filed by
defendant Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (LDHH). Plaintiff has
filed an opposition (doc. 39) and a request to file supplemental more definite
statement (doc. 40). There is no need for oral argument.
Rule 12(b)(6) provides for dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). In reviewing the complaint, courts
accept all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true. C.C. Port, Ltd. v. DavisPenn Mortg. Co., 61 F.3d 288, 289 (5th Cir. 1995). Courts do not, however,
accept as true all legal conclusions. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949
(2009). Instead, “the complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted
as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. (quoting Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). That is, a plaintiff must
provide sufficient factual content for the court to reasonably infer that the plaintiff
is entitled to relief based upon the context of the case and the court’s “judicial
experience and common sense.” Id. at 1949-50. Courts, therefore, must first
identify the conclusory allegations, which do not receive a presumption of truth,

and then determine whether the remaining factual allegations plausibly give rise
to an entitlement of relief. Id. at 1950.
Upon consideration of the legal arguments raised by defendant LDHH’s
motion to dismiss (doc. 35), and considering the allegations stated in plaintiff’s
complaint and in plaintiff’s more definite statement (doc. 26), the court finds that
plaintiff Jones has failed to state a claim against LDHH upon which relief can be
granted. Putting aside the conclusory allegations, which are not entitled to a
presumption of truth, and focusing on the factual allegations in the complaint and
amended statement (doc. 26), plaintiff Jones does not allege sufficient facts
entitling him to relief against LDHH.
Plaintiff has requested leave to file a supplemental more definite statement
against LPSC, LDEQ, and LDHH (doc. 40). However, plaintiff has already filed a
more definite statement regarding his claims against these defendants (doc. 26).
The court finds that any further amended complaint or “supplemental more
definite statement” by plaintiff against LPSC, LDEQ, and LDHH would be futile.
Defendant Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals’ motion (doc. 35)
to dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s claims against Louisiana Department of
Health and Hospitals are HEREBY DISMISSED. Plaintiff’s request (doc. 40) to
file supplemental more definite statement is HEREBY DENIED.
Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on July 25, 2011.





JUDGE JAMES J. BRADY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA