Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MULVIHILL v. UNITED STATES POST OFFICE

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania


January 14, 2004.

THOMAS R. MULVIHILL
v.
UNITED STATES POST OFFICE

The opinion of the court was delivered by: LEGROME DAVIS, District Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Plaintiff Thomas Mulvihill ("Plaintiff) filed this action against Defendant United States Post Office ("Defendant") on April 21, 2003. Defendant now moves to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Dkt. No. 6).

A motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. See Markowitz v. Northeast Land Co., 906 F.2d 100, 103(3dCir. 1990): Sturm v. Clark, 835 F.2d 1009. 1011 (3d Cir. 1987). In considering a motion to dismiss, the court must accept as true all factual allegations of the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Board of Trs. of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen Local 6 of N.J. v. Wettlin Assoc., Inc., 237 F.3d 270, 272 (3d Cir. 2001). This is especially true where, as here, the complaint is filed pro se. See McGrath v. Johnson, 67 F. Supp.2d 499, 505 (E.D. Pa. 1999) (The court must "read a pro se Plaintiff's allegations liberally and apply a less stringent standard to the pleadings of a pro se plaintiff than to a complaint drafted by counsel."); Dluhos v. Strasberg, 321 F.3d 365, 369 (3d Cir. 2003) (noting that a court must liberally construe the pleadings of a pro se plaintiff). Nevertheless, even pro se plaintiffs must comply with the Rules of Civil Procedure and draft a complaint to which defendants can meaningfully respond.

  Plaintiff's Complaint does not satisfy even the most relaxed pleading standard. It either omits altogether or fails to identify with any specificity the parties, the jurisdictional basis of Plaintiff's claims, proper venue, any factual allegations, the nature of Plaintiff's claims and/or the legal basis for those claims, and the relief requested. Indeed, Plaintiff's Complaint is blank.

  ACCORDINGLY, this ___ day of January, 2004, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 6), and Plaintiff's response thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motion is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff's right to file by February 11, 2004 an amended complaint that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.*fn1


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.