United States District Court, D. Utah
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER TO CURE DEFICIENT
A. Kimball District Judge
inmate Hilario Medina, brings this pro se
civil-rights action, see 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983
(2019),  in forma pauperis, see
28 Id. § 1915. Having now screened the
Complaint, (Doc. No. 5), under its statutory review function,
Court orders Plaintiff to file an amended complaint to cure
deficiencies before further pursuing claims.
(a) does not properly affirmatively link defendant to
(b) appears to inappropriately allege civil-rights violations
on respondeat-superior theory.
(c) shows confusion about how to state a claim of failure to
protect. (See below.)
(d) has claims apparently regarding current confinement;
however, complaint seems not to have been drafted with
contract attorneys' help.
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a complaint
to contain "(1) a short and plain statement of the
grounds for the court's jurisdiction . . .; (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." Rule 8's requirements mean to guarantee
"that defendants enjoy fair notice of what the claims
against them are and the grounds upon which they rest."
TV Commc'ns Network, Inc. v ESPN, Inc., 767
F.Supp. 1062, 1069 (D. Colo. 1991).
litigants are not excused from meeting these minimal pleading
demands. "This is so because a pro se plaintiff requires
no special legal training to recount the facts surrounding
his alleged injury, and he must provide such facts if the
court is to determine whether he makes out a claim on which
relief can be granted." Hall v. Bellmon, 935
F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). Moreover, it is improper
for the Court "to assume the role of advocate for a pro
se litigant." Id. Thus, the Court cannot
"supply additional facts, [or] construct a legal theory
for plaintiff that assumes facts that have not been
pleaded." Dunn v. White, 880 F.2d 1188, 1197
(10th Cir. 1989).
should consider these general points before filing an amended
revised complaint must stand entirely on its own and shall
not refer to, or incorporate by reference, any portion of the
original complaint. See Murray v. Archambo, 132 F.3d
609, 612 (10th Cir. 1998) (stating amended complaint
supersedes original). The amended complaint may also not be
added to after filing without moving for
complaint must clearly state what each defendant--typically,
a named government employee--did to violate Plaintiff's
civil rights. See Bennett v. Passic, 545 F.2d 1260,
1262-63 (10th Cir. 1976) (stating personal participation of
each named defendant is essential allegation in civil-rights
action). "To state a claim, a complaint must 'make
clear exactly who is alleged to have done
what to whom.'" Stone v.
Albert, 338 Fed.Appx. 757, (10th Cir. 2009)
(unpublished) (emphasis in original) (quoting Robbins v.
Oklahoma, 519 F.3d 1242, 1250 (10th Cir. ...