Prince v. Kent et al

Filing 50

ORDER granting 48 Motion to Dismiss, and 49 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JAMES J. PRINCE,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 16-10020
v.
Hon. John Corbett O’Meara
K. KENT, DHS Specialist, et al.,
Defendants.
____________________________/
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
Before the court are Defendants’ motions to dismiss Plaintiff’s amended
complaint, filed September 12, 2016. See Docket Nos. 48, 49. Appearing pro se,
Plaintiff has not responded to either motion.
In an order dated June 7, 2016, the court provided Plaintiff with the
opportunity to submit an amended complaint in compliance with the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and Local Rules of the Eastern District of Michigan. On
August 3, 2016, the court granted Plaintiff an extension of time to file his amended
complaint, which was due August 31, 2016. On August 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed a
document entitled “Plaintiff Amended Civil and Criminal Complaint,” which is in
the form of a brief rather than a complaint.

Defendants filed motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint based
upon this failure as well as a lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), 12(b)(6), 41(b). Having reviewed Defendants’
motions, and receiving no response from Plaintiff, the court concludes that it lacks
subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motions to
dismiss (Docket Nos. 48, 49) are GRANTED and Plaintiff’s amended complaint is
DISMISSED.
s/John Corbett O’Meara
United States District Judge
Date: January 23, 2017

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties of record on this date, January 23, 2017, using the ECF system and/or
ordinary mail.

s/William Barkholz
Case Manager

-2-