Obataiye v. Duke et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. SEE OPINION for complete details. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 04/12/2018. Copy of Memorandum Opinion mailed to Plaintiff as directed.(ccol, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
UHURU'SEKOU KAMARA AJANI
Civil Action No. 3:17CV558-HBH
MICHAEL DUKE, et al..
(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 thata 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 AgainstPoverty in Roanoke Valley, 145 F.3d 653, 658 (4th Cir. 1998')
(citing 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Plaintiffs current rambling allegations fail to provide each
defendant with fair notice of the facts and legal basis upon which his or her liabilityrests.
See BellAtl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355
U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). Moreover, Plaintiff does not identify the particular constitutional
right that was violated by the defendants' conduct.
Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on March 13, 2018, the Court
directed Plaintiff to submit a particularized complaint within fourteen (14) days of the
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?