Unger v. Whitley, No. 7:2016cv00471 - Document 14 (W.D. Va. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Norman K. Moon on 10/21/2016. (tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Unger v. Whitley Doc. 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION ROBERT ALLEN UNGER, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN JAMES WHITLEY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 7:16cv00471 MEMORANDUM OPINION By: Norman K. Moon United States District Judge Robert Allen Unger, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed a civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Warden James Whitley. Having reviewed the complaint, I conclude that Unger fails to state a claim against Warden Whitley and, therefore, will dismiss the complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). To state a cause of action under §1983, a plaintiff must allege facts indicating that he has been deprived of rights guaranteed by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that this deprivation resulted from conduct committed by a person acting under color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988). Inasmuch as Whitley alleges no facts against, or conduct committed by, Warden Whitley, I conclude that Unger has failed to state a claim against Warden Whitley. See, e.g., Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (noting a plaintiff’s basis for relief “requires more than labels and conclusions . . . .”). Accordingly, I will dismiss Unger’s complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1).1 21st ENTER: This ____ day of October, 2016. 1 In addition, Unger’s complaint is largely incomprehensible. However, I note that this dismissal is without prejudice to Unger’s ability to re-file a complaint in a separate civil action, clearly alleging facts against the named defendant or a different defendant. The dismissal is also without prejudice to Unger’s ability to file a habeas petition after exhausting his state court remedies. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
