Juste v. US Department of Justice et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 7/12/17. (copy mailed to pro se plaintiff).(jtho, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Civil Action No. 3:16CV833
US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et a/..
Plaintiff, a federal inmate proceeding/jro se and informa pauperis, tiled 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. TotalAction Against Poverty in
Roanoke Valley, 145 F.3d 653, 658 (4th Cir. 1998) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 1983). In his currcm
Complaint, Plaintiff fails lo provide each defendant with fair notice of the facts and legal basis
upon which his or her liability rests. See BellAll. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,555 (2007)
(quoting Conleyv. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). Accordingly, by Memorandum Order
entered on June 1,2017, the Court direcied 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 June 1, 2017
Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise respond
to the June 1,2017 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be DISMISSED
An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.
M. Hannah Lauck
United States Distri
1 2 2017
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?