United States District Court, D. New Jersey
William Foster Brown, Jr., No. 4346974 Camden County
Correctional Facility Plaintiff Pro se
L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.
William Foster Brown, Jr., a pre-trial detainee presently
confined at the Camden County Correctional Facility in Camden
Court House, New Jersey, seeks to bring a claim pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983, against Defendants Detective Daniel
Colombaro, Assistant Prosecutor Barry Sullivan, and Assistant
Deputy PD Christopher Hoffner. See ECF No. 1.
time, the Court must review the Complaint, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) to determine whether it should be
dismissed as frivolous or malicious, for failure to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted, or because it seeks
monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will
dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim, with
leave to amend granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
Complaint lacks any factual allegations and consists of only
a few conclusory statements. As to Defendant Colombaro, he
states that he “conspired to falsely arrest for
fictitious crimes against a fictitious individual and
attempting to falsely imprison.” ECF No. 1 at 4. As to
Defendant Sullivan, he describes his involvement as
“maliciously prosecuting while conspiring to falsely
imprison for fictitious crimes against a fictitious
person.” Id. As to Defendant Hoffner, he
states that he “helped to perpetuate a conspiracy to
falsify crimes of a fictitious individual while providing
ineffective counsel demonstrating legal malpractice.”
Id. at 5. In the section of the Complaint where
Plaintiff is to describe his claims, Plaintiff states,
“Detective improperly charged me with fictious crimes
against a fictitious person while conspiring with the
prosecution and defense counsel to falsely imprison.”
Id. at 6. He requests “monetary damages and
punitive damages.” Id. at 7.
§ 1915(e)(2) requires a court to review complaints prior
to service in cases in which a plaintiff is proceeding in
forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The Court
must sua sponte dismiss any claim that is
frivolous, is malicious, fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b). This action is subject to sua sponte
screening for dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)
because the Plaintiff is proceeding in forma
survive sua sponte screening for failure to state a
claim, the complaint must allege “sufficient factual
matter” to show that the claim is facially plausible.
Fowler v. UPMS Shadyside, 578 F.3d 203, 210 (3d Cir.
2009). “‘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.'” Fair Wind
Sailing, Inc. v. Dempster, 764 F.3d 303, 308 n.3 (3d
Cir. 2014) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009)). “[A] pleading that offers ‘labels or
conclusions' or ‘a formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action will not do.'”
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).
Complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted; it is simply devoid of factual
allegations. In order to state a claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, the plaintiff must show that “‘(1)
the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting
under color of state law; and (2) that the conduct deprived a
person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution or laws of the United States.'”
Calhoun v. Young, 288 Fed.Appx. 47, 49 (3d Cir.
2008) (quoting Robb v. City of Phila., 733 F.2d 286,
290-91 (3d Cir. 1984)). The Plaintiff must, however, allege
“sufficient factual matter” to make such a claim
plausible. See, e.g., Fowler, 578
F.3d at 210; Fair Wind Sailing, 764 F.3d at 308 n.3.
Plaintiff alleges no facts from which the Court can assess
his claims. Plaintiff's statements in the Complaint are
nothing more than conclusory allegations, e.g.,
“conspired to falsely arrest for fictitious crimes,
” “maliciously prosecuting while conspiring to
falsely imprison, ” “helped to perpetuate a
conspiracy to falsify crimes, ” etc. See ECF
No. 1. Plaintiff has failed to provide the facts that explain
how he was allegedly conspired against, falsely imprisoned,
or maliciously prosecuted. Without any factual allegations,
the Court must dismiss the Complaint.
“plaintiffs who file complaints subject to dismissal
under [§ 1915] should receive leave to amend unless
amendment would be inequitable or futile.” Grayson
v. Mayview State Hosp., 293 F.3d 103, 114 (3d Cir.
2002). The Court will grant leave to amend ...