United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
SUNDARI K. PRASAD, Plaintiff,
SANDRA C. NORRIS, Defendants.
M.HANNAH LAUCK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. By
Memorandum Order entered on May 11, 2017, the Court directed
Plaintiff to file a particularized complaint. The Court
In order to state a viable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983,
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).
Courts must liberally construe pro se civil rights
complaints in order to address constitutional deprivations.
Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir.
1978). Nevertheless, "[principles requiring generous
construction of pro se complaints are not... without
limits." Beaudett v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d
1274, 1278 (4th Cir. 1985). Neither "inanimate objects
such as buildings, facilities, and grounds" nor
collective terms such as "staff or "agency"
are persons amenable to suit under § 1983. Lamb v.
Library People Them, No. 3:13-8-CMC-BHH, 2013 WL 526887,
at *2-3 (D.S.C. Jan. 22, 2013) (citations omitted) (internal
quotations omitted) (explaining the plaintiffs "use of
the collective term 'people them' as a means to name
a defendant in a § 1983 claim does not adequately name a
'person'"); see Preval v. Reno, No.
99-6950, 2000 WL 20591, at *1 (4th Cir. 2000) (citations
omitted) (affirming district court's determination that
Piedmont Regional Jail is not a "person" under
§ 1983). Moreover, in her current Complaint, Plaintiff
does not identify the particular constitutional right that
was violated by the defendants' conduct. In addition,
Plaintiffs current allegations also fail to provide each
defendant with fair notice of the facts and legal basis upon
which his or her liability rests. See Bell All. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conleyv.
Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).
current Complaint also fails to comply with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 8(a). That rule provides:
Claim for Relief. A pleading that states a claim for
relief must contain:
(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the
court's jurisdiction, unless the court already has
jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional
(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, which may include relief
in the alternative or different types of relief.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff fails to identify the basis
for the Court's jurisdiction and fails to provide a short
and plain statement of her claim.
Plaintiff is DIRECTED, within fourteen (14) days of the date
of entry hereof, to particularize her complaint in
conformance with the following directions and in the order
set forth below:
a. At the very top of the particularized pleading, Plaintiff
is directed to place the following caption in all capital
letters "PARTICULARIZED COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL ACTION
b. The first paragraph of the particularized pleading must
contain a list of defendants. Thereafter, in the body of the
particularized complaint, Plaintiff must set forth legibly,
in separately numbered paragraphs, a short statement of the
facts giving rise to his claims for relief. Thereafter, in
separately captioned sections, Plaintiff must clearly
identify each civil right violated. Under each section, the
Plaintiff must list each defendant purportedly liable under
that legal theory and explain why she believes each defendant
is liable to her. Such explanation should reference the
specific numbered factual paragraphs in the body of the
particularized complaint that support that assertion.
Plaintiff shall also include a prayer for relief.
c. The particularized pleading will supplant the prior
complaints. The particularized pleading must stand or fall of
its own accord. Plaintiff may not reference statements in the
particularized complaint must also comply with Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure Rule 8(a). FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE
FOREGOING DIRECTIONS WILL RESULT ...