United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
OPINION AND ORDER PARTIALLY DISMISSING THE CIVIL
RIGHTS COMPLAINT AND ORDERING THE SERVICE OF THE COMPLAINT ON
THE REMAINING DEFENDANTS BY THE U.S. MARSHALS
CARAM STEEH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Court has before it Plaintiff Neil Emery's pro
se civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. Plaintiff is an inmate currently confined at the
Michigan Reformatory in Ionia, Michigan. The Court has
reviewed the complaint and now DISMISSES IT IN PART.
The Court further ORDERS that the complaint be served by the
United States Marshals Service upon defendants Allen Kory,
Ogemaw County Sting Team, and Roscommon County.
Standard of Review
has been allowed to proceed without prepayment of fees. See
28 § U.S.C. 1915(a); McGore v. Wrigglesworth,
114 F.3d 601, 604 (6th Cir. 1997). However, 28 U.S.C. §
Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that
may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any
time if the court determines that:
(B) the action or appeal:
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law
or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325
(1989); see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25,
32 (1992). Sua sponte dismissal is appropriate if
the complaint lacks an arguable basis when filed.
McGore, 114 F.3d at 612.
complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations,
” the “[f]actual allegations must be enough to
raise a right to relief above the speculative level on the
assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true
(even if doubtful in fact).” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)(footnote and citations
omitted). Stated differently, “a complaint must contain
sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, ‘to state
a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). “A claim has facial
plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that
allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the
defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”
Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556).
establish a prima facie case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a
civil rights plaintiff must establish that: (1) the defendant
acted under color of state law; and (2) the offending conduct
deprived the plaintiff of rights secured by federal law.
Bloch v. Ribar, 156 F.3d 673, 677 (6th Cir.
1998)(citing Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535
(1981)). “If a plaintiff fails to make a showing on any
essential element of a § 1983 claim, it must
fail.” Redding v. St. Eward, 241 F.3d 530, 532
(6th Cir. 2001).