Austin v. Higgs et al

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM OPINION. See for complete details. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 03/09/2016. Clerk mailed copy to pro se Plaintiff. (nbrow)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division
CHARLES F. AUSTIN,
Plaintiff,

v.
JOSEPH A. HIGGS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

MAR - 9 20f6
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
RICHMOND, VA

Civil Action No. 3:15CV70-HEH

MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Dismissing Action Without Prejudice)
Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding prose and informa pauperis, filed this 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action. In order to state a viable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff
must allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived him or her of a
constitutional right or of a right conferred by a law of the United States. See Dowe v.

Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, 145 F.3d 653, 658 (4th Cir. 1998)
(citing 42 U.S.C. § 1983). In his current complaint, Plaintiff does not identify the
particular constitutional right that was violated by the defendants' conduct. Furthermore,
the Complaint failed to provide each defendant with fair notice of the facts and legal
basis upon which his or her liability rests.
Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on February 9, 2016, the Court
directed Plaintiff to submit a particularized complaint within fourteen (14) days of the
date of entry thereof. The Court warned Plaintiff that the failure to submit the
particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action.

More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the entry of the February 9, 2016
Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise
responded to the February 9, 2016 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be
dismissed without prejudice.
An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

Isl
HENRY E. HUDSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Date:~'"L.. 't Zol6
Richmond, Virgi'nia

2