United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dismissing Action Without Prejudice)
HENRY E. HUDSON, District Judge.
Plaintiff, a 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). In his current complaint, Plaintiff failed to provide each defendant with fair notice of the facts and legal basis upon which his or her liability rests. Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on February 24, 2014, 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 the particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action.
More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the entry of the February 24, 2014 Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise respond to the February 24, 2014 Memorandum Order. ...