Jones v. Garner-O'Conner et al

Filing 25

MEMORANDUM OPINION. SEE OPINION for complete details. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 05/14/2018. Copy mailed to Plaintiff as directed.(ccol, )

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

B L

)5W

TEVON JONES,

rijlRK U.S. DISTRICT OUURT

Plaintiff,

Civil Action No. 3:17CV424-HEH

MARILYN GARNER-O'CONNOR,
et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

(Dismissing Action Without Prejudice)

Plaintiff, a former Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and informa pauperise 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 ofthe 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 current Complaint is forty-three pages and is

comprised oframbling allegations that fail to provide each defendant with fair notice of
the facts and legal basis upon which his or her liability rests. See Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly,550 U.S. 544, 555(2007)(quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41,47(1957)).
Moreover, while Plaintiff identifies constitutional amendments, he fails to explain how
each defendant's conduct violated those constitutional rights. In addition, violations of

prison operating procedures do not implicate the Constitution and are not cognizable
under § 1983. See Riccio v. Cty. ofFairfax, 907 F.2d 1459, 1469(4th Cir. 1990);

Puranda v. Hill, No.3:10CV733-HEH,2012 WL 2311844, at *5(E.D. Va. June 18,

2012). Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on April 13,2018, the Court
directed Plaintiffto submit a particularized complaint within fourteen(14) days ofthe
date of entry thereof. The Court warned Plaintiff that the failure to submit the

particularized complaint would result in the dismissal ofthe action.
More than fourteen(14)days have elapsed since the entry ofthe April 13, 2018
Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise

respond to the April 13, 2018 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be
dismissed without prejudice.

An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

/s/

HENRY E. HUDSON

DateiOTlftu \ii 20tS
Richmond, Virginia

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE