Clark v. Jameson ( 2019 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT PADUCAH CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:19CV-P74-TBR JERRY L. CLARK, JR. PLAINTIFF v. JUDGE JAMES T. JAMESON et al. DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Jerry L. Clark, Jr., filed the instant pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action proceeding in forma pauperis. By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered July 31, 2019, the Court conducted initial review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (DN 8). The Court found that Plaintiff’s claims as stated in the complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which may be granted and for seeking monetary relief from a defendant immune from such relief. However, citing LaFountain v. Harry, 716 F.3d 944, 951 (6th Cir. 2013) (“[U]nder Rule 15(a) a district court can allow a plaintiff to amend his complaint even when the complaint is subject to dismissal under the [Prison Litigation Reform Act].”), the Court gave Plaintiff the opportunity to amend his complaint to name one of the Defendants in her individual capacity. The Court ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days and warned him that his failure to do so within the time allotted would result in dismissal of the instant action for the reasons stated in the Memorandum Opinion and Order. More than 30 days have passed, and Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s Order or take any other action in this case. Because Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint, the complaint must be dismissed for the reasons stated in the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order (DN 8). Therefore, the Court will enter a separate Order dismissing this action. Date: September 18, 2019 Thomas B. Russell, Senior Judge United States District Court cc: Plaintiff, pro se Defendants 4413.010