Ruffin v. Nebraska Dept. of Corrections et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, Plaintiffs Complaint is dismissed without prejudice because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. The Clerk of the court is directed to place the "28USC1915(g)_STR" flag on this matter. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
LAMONT RUFFIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
NEBRASKA DEPT. OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

4:12CV3058

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On June 11, 2012, the court
conducted an initial review of Plaintiff’s Complaint and found that it failed to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Filing No. 7.) The court gave Plaintiff
the opportunity to amend his claims, but warned Plaintiff that if he failed to amend
his Complaint by July 12, 2012, his Complaint “will be dismissed without further
notice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.” (Id. at CM/ECF
p. 9.) Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint. (See Docket Sheet.)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed without
prejudice because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
2.
A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this
Memorandum and Order.
3.
The Clerk of the court is directed to place the “28USC1915(g)_STR”
flag on this matter.

DATED this 31st day of July, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
s/ John M. Gerrard
United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend,
approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on
their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties
or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
2