Keita v. U.S. Small Business Administration et al
| Mohamed Keita |
| U.S. Small Business Administration, Jane Peas and U.S. Small Business Administration-PDC Disaster Assistance |
| 1:2007cv04958 |
| November 27, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Kings |
| Lois Bloom |
| Eric N. Vitaliano |
| Freedom of Information Act |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
24
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, Although the Court need no longer speculate as to Keita's race, origin, and religion - as it was forced to do when considering his initial complaint - his conclusory allegation of discrimination is exactly the sort of " ;unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation" that cannot plausibly support a lawsuit. It cannot be a platform for any claim against deft Pease or any of the SBA employees he references in the supplemental filings or against the SBA itself. When a complaint fails to comply with the pleading requirements set forth in Rule 8, the district court may dismiss it sua sponte. In light of pltff's pro se status, he was granted a second bite at the apple. His complete failure to sup plement his original complaint with any allegation of specific facts evidencing unlawful discrimination convinces the Court that any further opportunity to amend would be pointless. Accordingly, Keita's complaint is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this case. (Terminating 19 Motion to Amend/Correct/Supplement; Terminating 23 Motion for Discovery) (Ordered by Judge Eric N. Vitaliano on 3/10/2010) c/m Fwd. for Judgment. (Galeano, Sonia)
|
|
Filing
18
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: In line with the foregoing, plaintiff's causes of action for judicial review of his loan application denials are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff's claims against individual federal officials for monetary damages ar e dismissed, but, in light of Keita's pro se status, the Court grants him until 3/8/2010 to amend his complaint so as to set forth proper Bivens claims. The new pleading must be captioned "Amended Complaint", and shall be ar docket number 07-CV-4958. In the amended complaint, plaintiff is directed to bring the lawsuit against individual federal officials whom he claims violated his constitutional rights, and to set forth supporting facts with sufficient particularity to judge their plausibility. Failure to do so will result in the dismissal of the entire action with prejudice. Plaintiff's 14 motion to compel discovery is denied with leave to review should plaintiff file a plausible amended complaint that complies with the pleading requirements of Rule 8 as explicated in Iqbal. SO ORDERED. (Ordered by Judge Eric N. Vitaliano, on 2/3/2010) C/mailed. (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
