Juste v. US Department of Justice et al, No. 3:2016cv00833 - Document 10 (E.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 7/12/17. (copy mailed to pro se plaintiff).(jtho, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Juste v. US Department of Justice et al Doc. 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division -D IL H JUL \22aa ANDRE JUSTE, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No. 3:16CV833 US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et a/.. Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, a federal inmate proceeding/jro se and informa pauperis, tiled 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. TotalAction Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, 145 F.3d 653, 658 (4th Cir. 1998) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 1983). In his currcm Complaint, Plaintiff fails lo provide each defendant with fair notice of the facts and legal basis upon which his or her liability rests. See BellAll. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,555 (2007) (quoting Conleyv. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on June 1,2017, the Court direcied 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 the particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action. Dockets.Justia.com More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the entry of the June 1, 2017 Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise respond to the June 1,2017 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion. M. Hannah Lauck United States Distri Date: 1 2 2017 Richmond, Virginia
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
