Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Page v. Purdue Pharma Headquarters

United States District Court, D. New Mexico

December 27, 2019

WILFRED ALEXANDER PAGE, Plaintiff,
v.
PURDUE PHARMA HEADQUARTERS, et al. Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND TO SHOW CAUSE

          WILLIAM P. JOHNSON CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Complaint and Request for Injunction, Doc. 6, filed November 12, 2019 (“Amended Complaint”).

         Dismissal of Proceedings In Forma Pauperis

         Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis. See Order Granting Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Doc. 5, filed November 6, 2019. The statute governing proceedings in forma pauperis states "the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Webb v. Caldwell, 640 Fed.Appx. 800, 802 (10th Cir. 2016) ("We have held that a pro se complaint filed under a grant of ifp can be dismissed under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim . . . only where it is obvious that the plaintiff cannot prevail on the facts he has alleged and it would be futile to give him an opportunity to amend").

         The Court notified Plaintiff that the Complaint fails to state a claim because it fails to state with particularity what each Defendant did to Plaintiff:

While the Complaint alleges that Defendant Purdue Pharma "played a key role" and "lack[ed] transparency," “conclusory allegations without supporting factual averments are insufficient to state a claim on which relief can be based . . . [and] in analyzing the sufficiency of the plaintiff's complaint, the court need accept as true only the plaintiff's well-pleaded factual contentions, not his conclusory allegations.” Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). There are no factual allegations regarding the other Defendants.

         Order at 4, Doc. 5, filed November 6, 2019. The Court explained to Plaintiff that:

A complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). The Complaint must "make clear exactly who is alleged to have done what to whom, to provide each individual with fair notice." Robbins v. Oklahoma, 519 F.3d 1242, 1249-50 (10th Cir. 2008) (emphasis in original); see also Nasious v. Two Unknown B.I.C.E. Agents, at Arapahoe County Justice Center, 492 F.3d 1158, 1163 (10th Cir. 2007) (“[T]o state a claim in federal court, a complaint must explain what each defendant did to him or her; when the defendant did it; how the defendant's action harmed him or her; and, what specific legal right the plaintiff believes the defendant violated.”) (emphasis added). and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. Doc. 5 at 3-4.

         The Court dismisses this case because Plaintiff's Amended Complaint fails to state a claim. Despite the Court's explanation that a complaint must state with particularity what each Defendant did to Plaintiff, there are no factual allegations in the Amended Complaint regarding the named Defendants. Instead, the Amended Complaint states the events giving rise to Plaintiff's claims occurred with “Every Global Citizen receiving Medical RX's from Purdue Pharma” from “1892-Current Date, ” and that:

my Genome is the most advanced super human genome to date in which [unnamed] doctors alter my medical records in an attempt to publish me and my findings while not adhering to their care of treatment plan and under medicating me to try to gain access to my genome for their own selfish reasons case in question [Plaintiff] Wilfred Alexander Page (Medical Doctor Dr, Roger Gildersleeve) from his own misunderstandings of how and what drugs are how they are classified and how they work in a persons system.

         [sic] Amended Complaint at 5. The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim against the named Defendants and against Dr. Gildersleeve and the unnamed doctors because it does not explain what each named Defendant and doctors did to Plaintiff; when the they did it; how each Defendant's action harmed Plaintiff; and, what specific legal right Plaintiff believes they violated.

         Court's Power to Impose Filing Restrictions

         The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has discussed the Court's power to impose filing restrictions and the procedure for imposing filing restrictions:

“[T]he right of access to the courts is neither absolute nor unconditional and there is no constitutional right of access to the courts to prosecute an action that is frivolous or malicious.” Tripati v. Beaman,878 F.2d 351, 353 (10th Cir.1989) (per curiam) (citation omitted). “There is strong precedent establishing the inherent power of federal courts to regulate the activities of abusive litigants by imposing carefully tailored restrictions under the appropriate circumstances.” Cotner v. Hopkins,795 F.2d 900, 902 (10th Cir.1986). “Even onerous conditions may be imposed upon a litigant as long as they are designed to assist the ... court in curbing the particular abusive behavior involved, ” except that they “cannot be so burdensome ... as to deny a litigant meaningful access to the courts.” Id. (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted). “Litigiousness alone will not support an injunction restricting filing activities. However, injunctions are proper where the litigant's abusive and lengthy history is properly set forth.” Tripati, 878 F.2d at 353 (citations omitted). “[T]here must be some guidelines as to what [a party] must do to obtain ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.