JAMISON v. DWYER et al
OPINION. Signed by Judge John Michael Vazquez on 9/25/17. (cm, )
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
P/O DWYER, et al.,
CIV. ACTION NO. 16-9512 (JMV)
Midstate Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 866
Wrightstown, NJ 08562
Petitioner, pro se
STEPHEN D. HOLTZMAN, Esq.
JEFFREY S. MCCLAIN, Esq.
HOLTZMAN & MCCLAIN, PC
524 Maple Avenue, Suite 200
Linwood, NJ 08221
On behalf of Defendant Dr.
VAZQUEZ, U.S. District Judge
This matter comes before the Court upon Defendant’s motion for judgment on the
pleadings (ECF No. 15), and Plaintiff’s letter request to add defendants. (ECF No. 16.) For the
reasons discussed below, the Court grants Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and
dismisses the amended complaint without prejudice. In response to Plaintiff’s letter request to
add defendants, the Court will permit Plaintiff to reopen this matter if he files a properly amended
complaint within 30 days of the date of this Order.
Plaintiff, a prisoner acting pro se, initiated this action by filing a civil rights complaint on
December 27, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) Upon screening the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b), the Court dismissed the Complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim. (ECF
Nos. 2, 3.) Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on March 27, 2017, attempting to cure the
defects in his original complaint. (ECF No. 4.) The Court reopened this matter, and granted
Plaintiff in forma pauperis status pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 7.) The Court
screened the Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). (Id.) In an Opinion
dated May 25, 2017, the Court found that the Amended Complaint failed to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted, and noted the Amended Complaint would be dismissed without
prejudice in an accompanying order. (Id.) The Court, in error, entered an Order permitting the
§ 1983 claim against Defendant Kyzer to proceed. (ECF No. 8.)
Defendant Kyzer was served with the Amended Complaint on July 17, 2017 (ECF No. 12),
and he filed an answer on August 16, 2017. (ECF No. 13.) Noting the conflict between this
Court’s May 25, 2017 Opinion and Order, Defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c)1 on August 30, 2017. (ECF No. 15-4 at 6-7.)
On September 13, 2017, this Court received Plaintiff’s letter request for an extension of time to
add additional parties. (ECF No. 16).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) provides, “[a]fter the pleadings are closed--but early
enough not to delay trial--a party may move for judgment on the pleadings.” “A motion for
judgment on the pleadings based on the defense that the plaintiff has failed to state a claim is
analyzed under the same standards that apply to a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.” Revell v. Port Authority
of New York, New Jersey, 598 F.3d 128, 134 (3d Cir. 2010) (quoting Turbe v. Gov't of the V.I., 938
F.2d 427, 428 (3d Cir. 1991).
As this Court found in its Opinion dated May 25, 2017, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted against Defendant Kyzer. (ECF No. 7.)
The Court’s accompanying Order permitting plaintiff to proceed against Defendant Kyzer was
entered in error. (ECF No. 8.) Therefore, the Court grants Defendant Kyzer’s motion for
judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(c). The Amended
Complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff may submit an Amended Complaint within
thirty days of this Order.
An appropriate Order follows.
Date: September 25, 2017
At Newark, New Jersey
s/ John Michael Vazquez
JOHN MICHAEL VAZQUEZ
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?