McCray v. Jamaludeen et al

Filing 13

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 10/26/2017. Copy mailed to pro se plaintiff.(tjoh, )

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

OCT 2 6 2017

Richmond Division
CLERK, us ;•
RiC;-;MC>ivL V'-

BRIAN CURTIS McCRAY,

Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 3:17CV426-HEH

V.

ABDUL JAMALUDEEN, et al..
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

(Dismissing Action Without Prejudice)

Plaintiff, a former Virginia inmate proceedingpro 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

plaintiffmust 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). Plaintiffs current allegations 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)). Accordingly, by Memorandum Orderentered on October 3, 2017, 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 a

particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action.

More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the entry of the October 3,2017
Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise

respond to the October 3,2017 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be
dismissed without prejudice.

An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/
A

Date:Uci.2.S 2at')
Richmond, Virginia

HENRY E. HUDSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE