Vafides v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

Filing 12

Judge Allison D. Burroughs: ORDER entered. The Court orders that this action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. No filing fee is assessed. [Copy of order mailed to plaintiff on 5/16/2018.](PSSA, 3)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

ROBERT N. VAFIDES,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF
MASSACHUSETTS,
Defendant.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

C.A. No. 18-10525-ADB

ORDER
BURROUGHS, D.J.
For the reasons set forth below, the Court dismisses this action without prejudice.
On March 19, 2018, pro se litigant Robert N. Vafides, who is confined at the Pondville
Correction Center, filed twenty-six pages of hand-written documents.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, a federal court must conduct a preliminary screening of a
prisoner complaint in which the plaintiff seeks redress from a governmental entity or officers or
employees of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The statute authorizes a court
to dismiss a complaint sua sponte if it is “frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).
To state a claim for relief, a complaint must include “a short and plain statement of the
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). 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)).
Here, the documents Vafides filed fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted
because they do not contain a “short and plain statement of the claim” and do not show that
Vafides is entitled to relief. From their general appearance, the documents seem to be pleadings,
and the penmanship is admirable. However, the meaning of the papers is impenetrable. They
contain case citations, case summaries, statutes, references to other documents, statements of
law, and even the coronation dates of English monarchs, without any discernable narrative or
purpose. While many phrases can be understood independently, the pleading, taken as a whole,
is abstruse. The Court cannot discern any claim for relief. Further, it does not appear that
allowing Vafides to amend his papers would cure the pleading deficiencies.
Accordingly, the Court orders that this action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
No filing fee is assessed.
SO ORDERED.
May 16, 2018

/s/ Allison D. Burroughs
ALLISON D. BURROUGHS
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

2