Baker v. Jamaludeen et al
Filing
11
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 12/28/2018. (Copy mailed to Plaintiff at 2845 Center Street, Bethlehem, PA 18017) (smej, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division
RAINIER BAKER,
Plaintiff,
V.
Civil Action No.
3;18CV447
ABDLE JAMALUDEEN, ^ al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Rainier Baker, a former Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and
in forma 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.
See Dowe v. Total Action Against Poverty in
Roanoke Valley, 145 F.3d 653, 658 (4th Cir. 1998) (citing 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983). Neither ''inanimate objects such as buildings, facilities,
and grounds" nor collective terms such as "staff" or "agency" are
persons amenable to suit under § 1983.
Lamb v. Library People
Them, No. 3:13-8-CMC-BHH, 2013 WL 526887, at *2-3 (D.S.C. Jan. 22,
2013)
(citations
omitted)
(internal
quotations
omitted)
(explaining the plaintiff's "use of the collective term 'people
them' as a means to name a defendant in a § 1983 claim does not
adequately name a 'person'"); see Preval v. Reno, No. 99-6950,
2000 WL 20591, at *1 (4th Cir. Jan. 13, 2000) (citations omitted)
(affirming district court's determination that Piedmont Regional
Jail is not a ^^person" under § 1983).
Baker's allegations failed
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 Order entered
on September 21, 2018, the Court directed Baker to submit a
particularized complaint within fourteen (14) days of the date of
entry thereof. The Court warned Baker 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 September 21, 2018 Memorandum Order.
Baker failed to submit
a particularized complaint or otherwise respond to the September
21, 2018 Memorandum Order.^
Accordingly, the action will be
dismissed without prejudice.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum
Opinion to Baker.
j\
y
Date:
J
/s/
Robert E. Payne
Senior United States District Judge
Richmond, Virginia
^ On October 9, 2018, the United States Postal Service
returned the September 21, 2018 Memorandum Order to the Court
because Baker had been released from incarceration. On October
16, 2018, Baker contacted the Court and the Clerk remailed the
September 21, 2018 Memorandum Order to Baker. Nevertheless, Baker
filed no response.
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?