Alammani v. Norfolk County Correctional Facility

Filing 5

Judge William G. Young: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. If Alammani wishes to pursue this action, he must file an amended complaint within 42 days of the date of this order. Failure to comply with this action will result in dismissal of this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (PSSA, 3)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
ZIAD ARAFAT ALAMMANI,
Plaintiff,
v.
NORFOLK COUNTY CORRECTIONAL
FACILITY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 16-12440-WGY

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
YOUNG, D.J.

December 22, 2016

For the reasons set forth below, the Court directs the
plaintiff to file an amended complaint.
I.

Background
On November 30, 2016, pro se litigant Ziad Arafat Alammani

(“Alammani”), who claims that his true identity is Iscandar Maax,
filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

He names the Norfolk

County Correctional Facility, where he is incarcerated, as the
sole defendant.
The complaint is sixty-four pages long, most of which
consist only of single-spaced handwritten text.

The pleading is

difficult to understand, but the overall thrust appears to be
that the plaintiff is falsely incarcerated because of mistaken
identify.
II.

The plaintiff paid the $400 filing fee.

Discussion
Uunder 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, prisoner complaints in civil

actions that seek redress from a governmental entity or officers
or employees of a governmental entity are also subject to

screening.

This statute authorizes a federal court to dismiss a

complaint sua sponte if the claims therein are frivolous,
malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted,
or seek monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from
such relief.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).

In conducting this review, the Court liberally construes the
complaint because the plaintiff is proceeding pro se.

See Haines

v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972).
A.

Challenge to the Validity of Confinement

Here, Alammani has failed to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted.

To the extent he challenges the legality of his

conviction and incarceration, he must proceed in habeas corpus.
“Challenges to the validity of any confinement or to particulars
affecting its duration are the province of habeas corpus . . . .”
Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 750 (2004) (per curiam); see
also Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 81 (2005) (in a series of
Supreme Court decisions, “the Court has focused on the need to
ensure that state prisoners use only habeas corpus (or similar
state) remedies when they seek to invalidate the duration of
their confinement–either directly through an injunction
compelling speedier release or indirectly through a judicial
determination that necessarily implies the unlawfulness of the
State’s custody”).

Under federal statute, a litigant must

exhaust available state court remedies before he may seek habeas
corpus relief in a federal court.

See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b).

Although Alammani couches his claim as one of mistaken
2

identity and a request to correct a record to reflect his true
identity, at its heart, the his claim is one challenging the
validity of his confinement.
B.

Other Claims

To the extent that Alammani plaintiff is not challenging the
validity of his confinement, the plaintiff has failed to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted because the complaint does
not meet the requirements of Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure (“Rule 8(a)(2)”).

Under this rule, a complaint

must include “a short and plain statement of the claim showing
that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
8(a)(2).

Fed. R. Civ. P.

At a minimum, the complaint must “give the defendant

fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon
which it rests.”

Calvi v. Knox County, 470 F.3d 422, 430 (1st

Cir. 2006) (quoting Educadores Puertorriqueños en Acción v.
Hernández, 367 F.3d 61, 66 (1st Cir.

2004)).

Although the

requirements of Rule 8(a)(2) are minimal, “minimal requirements
are not tantamount to nonexistent requirements.”

Id. (quoting

Gooley v. Mobil Oil Corp., 851 F.2d 513, 514 (1st Cir. 1988)).
Here, Alammani has failed to provide a short and plain
statement of his claim.

Although the Court can discern within

the pleading the theme of mistaken identity (which, for the
reasons stated above, cannot be raised in federal court in a nonhabeas civil action), the complaint is drafted such that no other
claim is apparent.

If the plaintiff is attempting to additional

claims for relief, they elude comprehension and therefore do not
3

constitute a “short and plain statement of the claim.”
C.

Filing of an Amended Complaint

If Alammani would like to bring a claim other than one
explicitly or implicitly challenging the fact or duration of his
confinement, he must file an amended complaint that meets the
requirements of Rule 8(a)(2).

Any amended complaint must also

comply with other provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure that are applicable to the drafting of a pleading.
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 10, “[t]he title of the complaint must name
all the parties.”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a).

The claims in a

complaint must be set forth “in numbered paragraphs, each limited
as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.”
Civ. P. 10(b).

Fed. R.

Further, where a plaintiff brings claims against

more than one defendant in a single lawsuit, the claims must be
limited to those “arising out of the same transaction,
occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences.”
Civ. P. 20(a)(2)(A).

Fed. R.

Finally, the Court notes that the Norfolk

County Correctional Facility is merely a building and therefore
cannot be sued.
ORDER
If Alammani wishes to pursue this action, he must file an
amended complaint within 42 days of the date of this order.

The

amended complaint must comply with the above-discussed
requirements for a pleading.

Failure to comply with this action

will result in dismissal of this action for failure to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted.
4

SO ORDERED.
/s/ William G. Young
WILLIAM G. YOUNG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5