Webb v. Kimmel, et al.

Filing 43

MEMORANDUM OPINION. See Opinion for details. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 5/18/2023. (sbea)

Download PDF
Case 3:22-cv-00392-MHL Document 43 Filed 05/18/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID# 758 Case 3:22-cv-00392-MHL Document 43 Filed 05/18/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID# 759 Case 3:22-cv-00392-MHL Document 43 Filed 05/18/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID# 760 Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626,630 (1962)) (explaining that a court may "act on its own initiative" with respect to dismissals under Federal Rule 41(b)). Further,when a plaintiff is granted authorization to proceed informa pauperis, the court is obligated, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2),to screen the operative complaint to determine, among other things,whether the complaint states a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (explaining that "the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that ... the action ... fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted"). A complaint should survive only when a plaintiff has set forth "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell At!. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,570 (2007). The Court has reviewed Webb's Second Amended Complaint pursuant to this statutory screening obligation and finds that the stated "facts" amount to no more than mere "labels and conclusions" declaring that Webb is entitled to relief. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. Thus,the Second Amended Complaint,in its current form, fails to state a plausible claim for relief against Defendants. Accordingly, Webb's Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (ECF No. 35.) Defendants WUSA9, American Broadcast Company Inc., and James Christian Kimmel's Motions to Dismiss are DENIED as MOOT. (ECF Nos. 37, 41.) An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion. 5 - g - a.oa3 Date: I Richmond,Virginia 3

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?