ROSE JR. v. GERTZMAN et al

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM ORDER DISMISSING CASE for lack of jurisdiction, w/out prejudice. Signed by Judge Claire C. Cecchi on 5/31/2016. (nr, )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

TROY R. ROSE JR.,
Civil Action No. 15-1604 (CCC)
Plaintiff,

v.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

DR. GLORIA GERTZMAN, et a!.,
Defendants.

Plaintiff Troy R. Rose, Jr. is proceeding, informa pauperis, on a civil rights Complaint for
relief under 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983. At this time, the Court must review the Complaint to determine

whether it should be dismissed as frivolous or malicious, for failure to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or because it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from
such relief. See 2$ U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2).

Although Plaintiff declares that he is initiating an action under

§ 1983 (ECF No. 1 at 2),

nowhere in the Complaint does Plaintiff allege that any defendant violated any of his rights
guaranteed by the federal constitution and/or federal law.’ Indeed, Plaintiff characterizes the
Complaint as asserting claims of “medical malpractice, damages, negligent infl[i]ction of
emotional distress, emotional disturbance, physical pain and anguish” (Id. at 7 & 9), and states that
his claims arises “out of the negligence and gross negligence” of the defendants (id. at 9). Plaintiff
makes no mention of the Constitution or any federal law anywhere in the Complaint, other than

Section 1983 actions require a defendant that, under color of state law, deprived the
plaintiff of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. 42 U.S.C. § 1983; see
Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40, 50-1 (1999); Morrow v. Balaski, 719 F.3d 160,
166-7 (3d Cir. 2013).

cursory references to

§ 1983.

See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837-38 (1994) (holding that

a constitutional denial of proper medical services requires more than mere malpractice or
negligence).
Accordingly, even though Plaintiff styles the Complaint as a
claims actually implicates

§ 1983 action, none of his

§ 1983. Rather, Plaintiffs Complaint raises only state law claims. As

Plaintiff has raised no federal claims, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to
adjudicate this case under 28 U.S.C.
IT IS onthis

§ 1331.

dayof

(‘.44./\

,2016,

ORDERED that the Complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of
jurisdiction; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve this Memorandum Order upon Petitioner by regular
mail; and it is further
ORDERED that he Clerk and shall CLOSE the file on this matter.

CLAIRE C. CECCHI, U.S.D.J.

2