United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
LESTER R. ROBINSON, Plaintiff,
SGT. JONES, el al., Defendants.
A. Gibney, Jr. United States District Judge.
R. Robinson, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and
in forma pauperis, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983
action. The action proceeds on Robinson's
Second Particularized Complaint ("Complaint," ECF
No. 11). The matter is before the Court for
evaluation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and
1915A. For the reasons set forth, the action will be
DISMISSED for failure to state a claim.
to the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") this
Court must dismiss any action filed by a prisoner if the
Court determines the action (1) "is frivolous" or
(2) "fails to state a claim on which relief may be
granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see 28
U.S.C. § 1915A. The first standard includes claims based
upon '"an indisputably meritless legal theory,
'" or claims where the '"factual
contentions are clearly baseless."' Clay v.
Yates, 809 F.Supp. 417, 427 (E.D. Va. 1992) (quoting
Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989)). The
second standard is the familiar standard for a motion to
dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).
motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) tests the sufficiency
of a complaint; importantly, it does not resolve contests
surrounding the facts, the merits of a claim, or the
applicability of defenses." Republican Party of N.C.
v. Martin, 980 F.2d 943, 952 (4th Cir. 1992) (citing 5A
Charles A. Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal
Practice and Procedure § 1356 (1990)). In
considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim,
a plaintiffs well-pleaded allegations are taken as true and
the complaint is viewed in the light most favorable to the
plaintiff. Mylan Labs., Inc. v. Matkari, 7 F.3d
1130, 1134 (4th Cir. 1993); see also Martin, 980
F.2d at 952. This principle applies only to factual
allegations, however, and "a court considering a motion
to dismiss can choose to begin by identifying pleadings that,
because they are no more than conclusions, are not entitled
to the assumption of truth." Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009).
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure "require[ ] only 'a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief,' in order to 'give the
defendant fair notice of what the ... claim is and the
grounds upon which it rests."' Bell All. Corp.
v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (second alteration
in original) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41,
47 (1957)). Plaintiffs cannot satisfy this standard with
complaints containing only "labels and conclusions"
or a "formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action." Id. (citations omitted). Instead, a
plaintiff must allege facts sufficient "to raise a right
to relief above the speculative level," id.
(citation omitted), stating a claim that is "plausible
on its face," id. at 570, rather than merely
"conceivable." Id. "A claim has
facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (citing BellAtl.
Corp., 550 U.S. at 556). In order for a claim or
complaint to survive dismissal for failure to state a claim,
therefore, the plaintiff must "allege facts sufficient
to state all the elements of [his or] her claim."
Bass v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 324 F.3d
761, 765 (4th Cir. 2003) (citing Dickson v. Microsoft
Corp., 309 F.3d 193, 213 (4th Cir. 2002); Iodice v.
United States, 289 F.3d 270, 281 (4th Cir. 2002)).
Lastly, while the Court liberally construes pro se
complaints, Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151
(4th Cir. 1978), it does not act as the inmate's
advocate, sua sponte developing statutory and
constitutional claims the inmate failed to clearly raise on
the face of his complaint. See Brock v. Carroll, 107
F.3d 241, 243 (4th Cir. 1997) (Luttig, J., concurring);
Beaudett v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1278
(4th Cir. 1985).
Complaint, Robinson provides the following summary of his
I came from Newport News Jail to Hampton Roads Regional Jail
on 2/21/18, 1 was expecting my legal mailed from Newport News
Jail to be forwarded here. At the time, Officer White and
Sgt. Jones was handling property.. .. This caused the
dysfunctional process of me losing contact with the United
States District Court's address. I was so stressed that I
lost 30lbs weight from 190 to 160.
My only theory of this matter is Newport News and Hampton go
hand to hand with trying to eliminate and downplay my efforts
of relief because of poor untrained staff, colleagues, and
My First Amendment was violated from the poor responses and
lack of effort to grant me sincere assistance.
Officer White, I request she send the address a copy photo or
the envelope. She rip the corn[er] address that I had as
evidence for the petition I had process in Newport News Jail,
without my authorization! I requested for my certificates of
achievements a copy of them and Sgt Jones said only if
I'm going to court. I said yes for my appeal, the[y]
refuse to grant my request?
They violated my First, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments by
not producing the documents I request, and destroying the
document I have thus far that I have as proof! Both of the
officers didn't know what the[y] was doing and said that
they were new in this department of business. I took all the
correct efforts and remedies [and] followed on up to now,
request complaints and grievances and all was ...