The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hochberg, District Judge:
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Deputy Attorney General Michael Wicke's Motion to Dismiss the claims asserted against him. The Court has reviewed the parties' submission pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78.
Plaintiff Kervin Michel brings claims arising from his August 29, 2006 arrest and subsequent civil commitment proceedings.*fn2
On March 12, 2009, Plaintiff was admitted to Anne Klein Forensic Center, where he stayed until discharged on May 7, 2009. During that time, he had one extended interview with Dr. Mahmood Ghahramini and was diagnosed with both delusional and paranoid personality disorders. He was not medicated for this condition. According to Plaintiff's Discharge Summary, Superior Court Judge Harold. W. Fullilove ordered Plaintiff's commitment for a 30-day Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial. Plaintiff contends he has no history of mental illness. After being discharged from Anne Klein, Plaintiff was returned to the Essex County Jail. In October 2009, Plaintiff's family hired a new attorney who discovered that the commitment order was submitted by the Essex County Prosecutor, then Paula Dow, and was signed by Superior Court Judge Michael J. Nelson. The commitment order required Dow to notify the Essex County Adjuster and to forward any discoverable materials to Plaintiff. He claims neither ever happened. On October 27, 2009, Plaintiff was transferred to Greystone Park Psychiatric Hospital. He was released on December 14, 2009.
Plaintiff contends that at all relevant times Deputy Attorney General Wicke was acting prosecutor with the Essex County Prosecutor's Office and in that role "failed to notify the Essex County Adjuster of defendant's status, or forward the appropriate paperwork," resulting in Plaintiff's illegal detention.
On May 11, 2011l, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint, asserting the following claims against the moving Defendant: (1) 4th, 5th and 14th Amendment violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and (2) conspiracy pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986.
To survive a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), "a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, 'to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.' 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." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)).
While courts must generally accept Plaintiff's factual allegations as true, they are also entitled to consider documents "integral to" the complaint. In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. Litig., 114 F.3d 1410, 1426 (3d Cir. 1997). Additionally, courts may review documents explicitly relied on or incorporated by reference in the pleading. Id.
Plaintiff brings claims against Defendant in both his official and individual capacities.
Defendant argues that a dismissal with prejudice is appropriate because as a state official he is entitled to ...