Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-03057-BNB
12-09-2011
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, C. Islam Shabazz, currently resides in Denver, Colorado. Plaintiff, acting pro se, initiated this action by filing a complaint. The Court must construe the complaint liberally because Plaintiff is not represented by an attorney. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). However, the Court should not act as a pro se litigant's advocate. See Hall, 935 F.2d at 1110. For the reasons stated below, Mr. Shabazz will be ordered to file an amended complaint.
The Court has reviewed the complaint and has determined that it is deficient because the complaint does not comply with the pleading requirements of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The twin purposes of a complaint are to give the opposing parties fair notice of the basis for the claims against them so that they may respond and to allow the Court to conclude that the allegations, if proven, show that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. See Monument Builders of Greater Kansas City, Inc. v. American Cemetery Ass'n of Kansas, 891 F.2d 1473, 1480 (10th Cir. 1989). The requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 are designed to meet these purposes. See TV Communications Network, Inc. v. ESPN, Inc., 767 F. Supp. 1062, 1069 (D. Colo. 1991), aff'd, 964 F.2d 1022 (10th Cir. 1992). Specifically, Rule 8(a) provides that a complaint "must contain (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, . . . (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought." The philosophy of Rule 8(a) is reinforced by Rule 8(d)(1), which provides that "[e]ach allegation must be simple, concise, and direct." Taken together, Rules 8(a) and (d)(1) underscore the emphasis placed on clarity and brevity by the federal pleading rules.
Mr. Shabazz fails to set forth a short and plain statement of the grounds on which the Court's jurisdiction depends. In other words, he fails to cite the statutory authority that allows this Court to consider any claims he may be asserting in this action. He also fails to provide a short and plain statement of his claims showing that he is entitled to relief. In fact, he fails to assert any claims, alleging only that his appeal was denied by the Social Security Commission.
Neither the Court nor the defendant is required to speculate about the claims Mr. Shabazz is asserting. The general rule that pro se pleadings must be construed liberally has limits and "the court cannot take on the responsibility of serving as the litigant's attorney in constructing arguments and searching the record." Garrett v. Selby Connor Maddux & Janer, 425 F.3d 836, 840 (10th Cir. 2005).
A decision to dismiss a pleading pursuant to Rule 8 is within the trial court's sound discretion. See Atkins v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 967 F.2d 1197, 1203 (8th Cir. 1992); Gillibeau v. City of Richmond, 417 F.2d 426, 431 (9th Cir. 1969). The Court finds that the complaint does not meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and that Plaintiff should be given an opportunity to file an amended complaint. Therefore, Mr. Shabazz will be ordered to file an amended complaint that complies with the pleading requirements of Rule 8 if he wishes to pursue his claims in this action. Mr. Shabazz is advised that it is his responsibility to present his claims clearly and concisely in a manageable format that allows the Court and the defendant to know what claims are being asserted and to be able to respond to those claims. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff, C. Islam Shabazz, file, within thirty days from the date of this order, an amended complaint that complies with the pleading requirements of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Shabazz shall obtain the Court-approved complaint form, along with the applicable instructions, at www.cod.uscourts.gov for use in filing the amended complaint. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails within the time allowed to file an amended complaint that complies with this order the complaint and the action will be dismissed without further notice.
DATED December 9, 2011, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge