BEAM v. POOLE et al

Filing 12

ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER on 08/14/2018, that this action be filed and DISMISSED sua sponte without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a new complaint on the proper § 1983 forms. (Garland, Leah)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
MANNO BEAM,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
KATY POOLE, et al.,
Defendants.

1:18CV52

ORDER
On April 30, 2018, the United States Magistrate Judge’s Order
and Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636.

Plaintiff did not file objections

within the time limit prescribed by Section 636 for asserting
objections to the Recommendation.

Plaintiff instead filed a

response styled as an amended complaint. (Doc. 7.)

Plaintiff also

filed a letter motion (Doc. 8) seeking to add to his complaint his
pending

claim

subsequently

with
filed

the
a

Industrial

substantially

Commission.
similar

second

Plaintiff
amended

complaint (Doc. 9) along with a new application (Doc. 10) to
proceed in forma pauperis.
The court has reviewed the amended complaint, the letter
motion, and the second amended complaint, but notes that the
amendments were not filed on the appropriate forms for bringing a
§ 1983 action, and the proposed amendments do not include all of

the relevant information for asserting a claim.

For example, the

proposed amendments do not identify who is being named as a
defendant.

Therefore, the proposed amendments will be denied

without prejudice to Plaintiff refiling his claims on the proper
forms, correcting the defects cited in the Recommendation.
IT

IS

THEREFORE

ORDERED

that

this

action

be

filed

and

DISMISSED sua sponte without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a new
complaint on the proper § 1983 forms.

/s/
Thomas D. Schroeder
United States District Judge
August 14, 2018

2