Pretty v. Commonwealth Attorney's Office
Filing
8
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 10/6/2014. Copies as DIRECTED to Plaintiff.(cmcc, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
E
L
—,!M
OCT-7 2014 jV
Richmond Division
CLERK, U.S. DISTfl.CT COUR1
RICHMOND VA
ERIC PRETTY,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 3:14CV355-HEH
COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Dismissing Action Without Prejudice)
Plaintiff, a Virginia detainee, submitted this civil action. The Complaint in this
action fails to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). That rule provides:
(a) Claim for Relief. A pleading that slates a claim for relief must contain:
(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction,
unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new
jurisdictional support;
(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled to relief; and
(3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the
alternative or different types of relief.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff fails to identify the basis for the Court's jurisdiction or
provide a short and plain statement of his claim. Accordingly, by Memorandum Order
entered on August 20, 2014, the Court directed Plaintiff, within fifteen (15) days of the
date of entry thereof, to file a complaint that complies with Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 8(a). The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to comply with the above
directions would result in the dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
More than fifteen (15) days have elapsed since the entry of the August 20, 2014
Memorandum Order and Plaintiff has failed to filed a response. Accordingly, the action
will be dismissed without prejudice.
An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.
J^
a
Date: ft,f &20lj
Richmond, Virginia
/s/
HENRY E. HUDSON
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?