Opinion
Civil Action No. 3:17CV426-HEH
10-25-2017
BRIAN CURTIS McCRAY, Plaintiff, v. ABDUL JAMALUDEEN, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Dismissing Action Without Prejudice)
Plaintiff, 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). Plaintiff's current allegations fail 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 October 3, 2017, the Court directed 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 a particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action.
More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the entry of the October 3, 2017 Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise respond to the October 3, 2017 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be dismissed without prejudice.
An appropriate order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/_________
HENRY E. HUDSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Date: October 25, 2017
Richmond, Virginia