Webb v. Palmer

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

* JAELAND WEBB, * Plaintiff, * v. * Civil No. 25-00219-BAH KAYLA PALMER ET AL., * Defendants. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff Jaeland Webb (“Plaintiff”) filed the above-captioned complaint pro se together with a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF 2, which was granted. ECF 7. On March 31, 2025, this Court ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint to cure identified pleading deficiencies. ECF 7. On April 8, 2025, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, ECF 8, but failed to cure the deficiencies in the Complaint. As such, the case will be dismissed. In the Amended Complaint, ECF 8, Plaintiff merely states “2nd complaint, [t]reason[,] 18 U.S.C. 3571, [f]orced compliance = slavery[,] 18 USC 3577, [a]nd from this corporation I Mr. Webb [am] also still getting mail threats[,] 18 USC 872.” Id. at 1. The Amended Complaint also states: “[m]y relief I ask[] for [is] compensation [a]nd protection of my rights.” Id. The Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to put forth specific factual allegations to support his claims or address the deficiencies identified in this Court’s memorandum opinion issued on March 31, 2025. In addition to its “inherent authority” to dismiss “frivolous complaints,” Chong Su Yi v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 554 F. App’x 247, 248 (4th Cir. 2014), a court can also dismiss a complaint sua sponte for failure to state a claim. See Webb v. EPA, 914 F.2d 1493 (4th Cir. 1990). However, “district courts may only exercise their authority to sua sponte dismiss inadequate complaints if the procedure employed is fair to the parties. Namely, the party whose complaint stands to be dismissed must be afforded notice and an opportunity to amend the complaint or otherwise respond.” Robertson v. Anderson Mill Elementary Sch., 989 F.3d 282, 291 (4th Cir. 2021). The

Court has afforded Plaintiff an opportunity to cure the deficiencies identified in the prior Complaint and Plaintiff has failed to do so. Because Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is devoid of specific factual allegations, the Amended Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice. Accordingly, it is this 21 day of April 2025, by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice; 2. The Clerk SHALL PROVIDE a copy of this Order to Plaintiff; and 3. The Clerk SHALL CLOSE this case.

Dated: April 21, 2025 /s/ Brendan A. Hurson United States District Judge