Rafi v. Brigham and Women's Hospital et al

Filing 48

Judge George A. OToole, Jr: ORDER entered denying (46) Motion for Leave to File Document ; granting in part and denying in part (26) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting in part and denying in part (28) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting in part and denying in part (29) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim in case 1:14-cv-14017-GAO; granting in part and denying in part (18) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting in part and denying in part (20) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim in case 1:14-cv-14205-GAO Associated Cases: 1:14-cv-14017-GAO, 1:14-cv-14205-GAO(Lyness, Paul)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-14017-GAO
SYED K. RAFI, PhD.,
Plaintiff,
v.
BRIGHAM AND WOMEN’S HOSPITAL, CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL BOSTON,
MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL, and HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL,
Defendants.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-14205-GAO
SYED K. RAFI, PhD.,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL BOSTON and HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL,
Defendants.

ORDER
March 4, 2016
O’TOOLE, D.J.
The plaintiff, acting pro se, initiated the above captioned actions alleging what appear to
be claims for employment discrimination in violation of Title VI and/or Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964. All of the defendants have moved to dismiss these claims for failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted, and some have also moved under Rule 12(e) for the
plaintiff to provide a more definite statement of his claims. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(6), 12(e).
The plaintiff’s claims are unclear. The complaints do not comply with Rule 8’s command
that a complaint contain “a short and plain statement of the claim” or with Rule 10(b)’s requirement
that pleadings be written in separately numbered paragraphs, “each limited as far as practicable to

a single set of circumstances.” See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 8, 10. Nor is either complaint coherent enough
that it can fairly be said that it states “a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp.
v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007).
The parties have been treating these two cases as one by, among other things, filing nearly
identical papers in each. Because the cases share overlapping questions of law and fact, these
actions are consolidated for all purposes. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 42. All papers shall hereafter be
filed under the caption for the first filed case, Civil Action No. 14-14017-GAO.
In order for the defendants to be put on adequate notice of the claims against them and for
them to have an adequate opportunity to respond, the plaintiff must file a clearer consolidated
complaint. That complaint must identify specific facts outlining the claims against each of the
separately named defendants.
Within thirty-five days of the date of this Order, the plaintiff shall file and serve a
consolidated complaint that complies with Rules 8 and 10. That complaint should contain the
factual basis of the plaintiff’s claims and be coherently pled. The plaintiff is advised that this action
is subject to dismissal if he fails to comply with the directives contained in this Order. The
defendants shall answer or move with respect to the consolidated complaint within twenty-one
days after its service.
Accordingly, Harvard Medical School’s Motion to Dismiss (dkt. no. 26 in 14-14017 and
dkt. no. 18 in 14-14205), Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Inc. and The General Hospital
Corporation d/b/a Massachusetts General Hospital’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for
a More Definite Statement (dkt. no. 28 in 14-14017), and Boston Children’s Hospital’s Motion to
Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More Definite Statement (dkt. no. 29 in 14-14017 and dkt. no.

2

20 in 14-14205) are all GRANTED to the extent outlined above and otherwise DENIED without
prejudice.
The plaintiff’s Motion to File Replies to Harvard Medical School’s Second Response (dkt.
no. 46 in 14-14017 and dkt. no. 36 in 14-14205) is DENIED.
It is SO ORDERED.
/s/ George A. O’Toole, Jr.
United States District Judge

3