RICHARD P. CONABOY, District Judge.
Julio Christian, an inmate presently confined at the Rockview State Correctional Institution, Bellefonte, Pennsylvania (SCI-Rockview) initiated this pro se civil rights action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Plaintiff's action was subsequently transferred to this Court. After being directed to do so, Plaintiff submitted an in forma pauperis application.
Named as sole Defendant in the Original Complaint is the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (Parole Board). Prior to screening of the Original Complaint, this Court issued an Order dated December 17, 2013 granting Plaintiff's motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint. See Doc. 12. The Order directed Christian to file a single, all inclusive, amended complaint solely regarding the allegations set forth in the Original Complaint.
Plaintiff was also advised that his amended complaint must be complete in all respects and must stand by itself without reference to the complaint or submissions already filed. The Order further directed that the amended complaint should clearly identify each Defendant, set forth the factual substance underlying Plaintiff's claims in short, concise and legible statements, and specify the constitutional claims and relief being sought.
On December 30, 2013, Plaintiff filed a one (1) page "Notice of Amended Complaint" which states that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would be substituted as the sole Defendant in this matter and that he would be seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. See Doc. 13-1. Along with the Notice, Christian also submitted a one (1) page "Amended Complaint" which consists of the following seven (7) single sentence paragraphs:
1. Official bad faith or harassment in enforcement of the statute or where other extraordinary circumstances justify federal relief.
2. That Judge was without jurisdiction to preside over his case.
3. That county had policy or custom, the execution of which resulted in Plaintiff's conviction and imprisonment.
4. That he will suffer irreparable damages and that he has no adequate remedy at law.
5. That Defendants acted under color of state law.
6. That the Justices or Judge acted outside their adjudicary [sic] capacity in issuing order and judgement [sic] in state court proceedings.
7. He is entitled to ...