Case: 19-10049 Date Filed: 04/25/2019 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 19-10049
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:18-cv-05197-TCB
BRENDA J. BURCH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WHEAT STREET TOWELS,
ERICA GILES,
Manager,
ERIC BORDERS,
CYNTHIA NIXON,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(April 25, 2019)
Case: 19-10049 Date Filed: 04/25/2019 Page: 2 of 3
Before WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR and HULL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Brenda Burch appeals pro se the sua sponte dismissal of her amended
complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The district court ruled that Burch’s
original complaint “lack[ed] an arguable basis either in law or fact,” id., ordered
her to “file an amended complaint within twenty-one days that identifie[d] the
legal basis for her claim, facts supporting it, and a prayer for relief,” and warned
that her failure to do so would result in the dismissal of her complaint. After Burch
filed an amended complaint that contained the same deficiencies as her original
complaint, the district court dismissed it. We affirm.
We review de novo the sua sponte dismissal of a complaint for failure to
state a claim. Alba v. Montford,
517 F.3d 1249, 1252 (11th Cir. 2008). A district
court must dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if it fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Although pro se
pleadings are construed liberally and subject to less stringent standards than those
drafted by lawyers, Alba, 517 F.3d at 1252, a complaint must allege enough facts
“to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face,” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly,
550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A claim is facially plausible “when the
plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
2
Case: 19-10049 Date Filed: 04/25/2019 Page: 3 of 3
556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). A plaintiff must allege “more than an unadorned, the-
defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Id.
The district court did not err by dismissing Burch’s amended complaint.
Burch failed to comply with the instructions of the district court to “identify a legal
basis for the claims against Defendant; allege . . . jurisdiction; [or] allege proper
venue . . . .” Her two-page amended complaint consists of a single paragraph with
indecipherable run-on sentences. Burch’s amended complaint fails to allege her
relationship with or the location of any incident with any individual defendant. For
example, Burch alleges that “Miss Cynthia and Eric Border began their attacks on
Me,” but she fails to allege how she knows the named persons, what they did to
her, or where the “attacks” occurred. Burch also identifies no legal cause of action
against any individual defendant or a legal ground on which to invoke the subject-
matter jurisdiction of the district court. The district court correctly dismissed
Burch’s amended complaint for failure to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
AFFIRMED.
3
