Allison v. Goode et al

Filing 16

MEMORANDUM OPINION. See Opinion for details. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr. on 8/3/2017. (sbea, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division ANTONIO LAMONT ALLISON, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No. 3:16CV832 D. GOODE,e/fl/., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se 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). Plaintiffs initial Complaint provided a long recitation of the content of various grievances he filed and the responses he received. The Court explained to Plaintiff that it was unclear exactly what constitutional claims he raised in his Complaint against each Defendant. Furthermore, Plaintiffs allegations 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 April 18, 2017, the Court directed Plaintiff to file a Particularized Complaint. (ECF No. 13, at 2.) The Court received Plaintiffs Particularized Complaint on May 1, 2017. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiffs Particularized Complaint, however, failed to correct the deficiencies identified by the Court. Instead, Plaintiff provided a vague, conclusory statement of his claims against each Defendant. Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on June 21, 2017, the Court directed Plaintiff to submit a second particularized complaint within fourteen (14) days of the date of entry thereof. (ECF No. 15, at 2-3.) The Court warned Plaintiff that the failure to submit the second particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action, {Id. at 2.) More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the entry of the June 21, 2017 Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a second particularized complaint or otherwise respond to the June 21, 2017 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. An appropriate Order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion. D.« f'//? Richmond, Virginia John A. Gibney, Jr. United States District e

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?