Oberlander v. McGinty et al

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM OPINION. See Opinion for complete details. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 08/15/2017. Copy mailed to Plaintiff as directed.(ccol, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Lk—IS—,

Richmond Division

SCOTT ANTHONY OBERLANDER,

AUG I 6 20IT
riFRK US. DiS

clerk.

Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 3:17CV265-HEH

V.

MICHAEL E. McGINTY, et aL,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

(Dismissing Action Without Prejudice)

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. SeeDowe 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 fails to provide the
defendants with fair notice of the facts and legal basis upon which his or her liability

rests. Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on July 13, 2017, the Court directed
Plaintiffto submit a particularized complaint within fourteen (14) days of the date of

entry thereof. The Court warned Plaintiffthat 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 July 13, 2017
Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise

owUBT

responded to the July 13, 2017 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be
dismissed without prejudice.

An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

/./

^

Date:iiy§J^S^
Richmond, Virginia

HENRY E. HUDSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE