From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Wilkie

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Oct 16, 2020
Civil Action No. 20-297E (W.D. Pa. Oct. 16, 2020)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 20-297E

10-16-2020

COREY L. HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT WILKIE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff's Complaint will be dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to the screening provisions in 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"), and the Complaint is subject to the screening provisions in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). See Atamian v. Burns, 2007 WL 1512020, *1-2 (3d Cir. May 24, 2007) ("the screening procedures set forth in [Section] 1915(e) apply to [IFP] complaints filed by prisoners and non-prisoners alike") (citations omitted). Among other things, the statute requires the Court to dismiss any action where the plaintiff has failed to state claims upon which relief may be granted. See Muchler v. Greenwald, 624 Fed. Appx. 794, 796-97 (3d Cir. Aug. 18, 2015).

Any leniency generally afforded pro se litigants notwithstanding, the Complaint fairly may be described as a word-salad of cryptic "factual" references - the context of which cannot be discerned and/or understood - generously spiced with "legalese" and laundry lists of constitutional and statutory provisions purportedly violated. See generally Doc. 5. As such, Plaintiff's filing runs afoul of Federal Rule 8. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) (requiring "short and plain statement[s]" showing that the pleader is entitled to relief) and 8(d)(1) ("Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.").

Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 5) is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. The dismissal is without prejudice to Plaintiff filing an amended complaint, by no later October 30 , 2020 , that complies with Federal Rule 8, and otherwise states claim(s) upon which relief properly may be granted. Should Plaintiff not timely file such an amended complaint, the Court summarily will enter an order converting the dismissal to one with prejudice. Finally, Plaintiff must make last, best efforts to comply with Rule 8, and to state claim(s) upon which relief properly may be granted, because further opportunity for amendment will not be afforded.

IT IS SO ORDERED. October 16, 2020

s/Cathy Bissoon

Cathy Bissoon

United States District Judge cc (via First-Class U.S. Mail): Corey L. Harris
965 East 31st Street
Erie, PA 16504


Summaries of

Harris v. Wilkie

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Oct 16, 2020
Civil Action No. 20-297E (W.D. Pa. Oct. 16, 2020)
Case details for

Harris v. Wilkie

Case Details

Full title:COREY L. HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT WILKIE, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Oct 16, 2020

Citations

Civil Action No. 20-297E (W.D. Pa. Oct. 16, 2020)