Pugh v. Department of Mental Health and Human Services (MAG+)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

DEVIN BRANDIS PUGH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 2:25-cv-53-RAH-JTA

) (WO)

DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL )

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

Before the court is the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by pro

se Plaintiff Devin Brandis Pugh.1 (Doc. No. 2.) Upon review of the motion, it is due to be

granted. In addition, Plaintiff will be ordered to file an amended complaint that complies

with this Order and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

I. DISCUSSION

Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the court must review his

pleading(s) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Under that statute, the court is required to

dismiss a complaint if it determines that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a

claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant immune

from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) – (iii). Upon review, the court finds the

1 As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has 30 cases currently pending in this court, all filed within the past

32 days.

complaint contains numerous deficiencies that must be remedied before this case can

proceed.

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a complaint fails to state a claim upon

which relief can be granted unless it contains “a short and plain statement of the claim

showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). While detailed factual

allegations are not required, a plaintiff must present “more than an unadorned, the-

defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)

(citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). “A pleading that offers

‘labels and conclusions’ or ‘a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will

not do.’” Id. “Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders ‘naked assertion[s]’ devoid of

‘further factual enhancement.’” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Factual 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).” Twombly, 550

U.S. at 555. Not only must a complaint include sufficient facts about a plaintiff’s injuries

sufficient to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, but, under Article III of the

United States Constitution, all plaintiffs must allege a “concrete and particularized” injury

that affects “the plaintiff in a personal and individual way.” Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578

U.S. 330, 339 (2016), as revised (May 24, 2016) (quotations omitted). If a plaintiff fails to

allege a concrete and personal injury, the plaintiff does not have standing to bring their

claim in federal court. Id. at 338–339.

Further, pro se plaintiffs may not bring claims on behalf of others. Johnson v. Brown,

581 F. App’x 777, 781 (11th Cir. 2014) (citing Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 873 (11th

Cir. 2008)). The statutory provision permitting parties to proceed pro se specifically states

that “parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally.” 28 U.S.C. § 1654

(emphasis added). This provision of § 1654 provides “a personal right that does not extend

to the representation of the interest of others.” Timson, 518 F.3d at 873.

Here, Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted

because it fails to supply any specific facts demonstrating why Defendant is liable. Plaintiff

fails to allege how Defendant Department of Mental Health and Human Services (sic)2

personally injured him. There are no allegations how Plaintiff personally suffered any

injury from lack of ability to obtain needed medication. Nor does he identify any particular

administrative or regulatory action (or lack of legally mandated action) on Defendant’s

behalf that caused him any injury. Plaintiff does state: “Many patients struggle to obtain

critical medications, particularly if those medications are classified as controlled or

scheduled.” (Doc. No. 1 at 1.) However, Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, so he cannot bring

claims seeking relief on behalf of patients other than himself. See Timson, 518 F.3d at 873.

Moreover, no cognizable legal cause of action is evident on the face of the

complaint, which essentially seeks to have the court set public policy and create new law.

Specifically, Plaintiff seeks relief in the form of changes to statutes and regulations of the

United States and the implementation of certain policies he believes will allow “patients”

to obtain their medications. (Id. at 2-3.) See Nw. Airlines, Inc. v. Transp. Workers Union of

Am., AFL-CIO, 451 U.S. 77, 95 (1981) (“[F]ederal courts, unlike their state counterparts,

2 It appears Plaintiff likely intended to name the United States Department of Health and Human Services

as Defendant. Plaintiff should correctly name the intended Defendant in his amended complaint.

are courts of limited jurisdiction that have not been vested with open-ended lawmaking

powers.”). The Supreme Court has “consistently . . . emphasized that the federal lawmaking

power is vested in the legislative, not the judicial, branch of government.” Id.; see also

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369, 392, (2024) (explaining the court’s

duty to “interpret constitutional and statutory provisions” (emphasis added; citation and

internal quotation marks omitted)). Thus, the complaint does not contain sufficient

allegations to establish that Plaintiff has a cognizable right to relief against Defendant, even

assuming Plaintiff’s factual allegations are true.

Additionally, because Plaintiff does not allege he has suffered any particular,

personalized, concrete injury attributable to Defendant, he fails to establish Article III

standing, which is necessary for the court to exercise jurisdiction. See Lujan v. Defenders

of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 & n.1(1992) (holding that, to have standing, the plaintiff

must have suffered a “particularized” injury, which means that “the injury must affect the

plaintiff in a personal and individual way”).

Furthermore, the court notes Plaintiff did not sign his complaint. “Every pleading,

written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the

attorney’s name—or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” Fed. R. Civ. 11(a).

“The court must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after

being called to the attorney’s or party’s attention.” Id. However, because an amended

complaint supersedes all previous complaints, Plaintiff must sign the amended complaint.

See Kelly v. Elite Roofing, LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-388-MHT-JTA, 2024 WL 4993858, at

*4 (M.D. Ala. Dec. 5, 2024) (explaining that an amended complaint supersedes and renders

“inoperative” any earlier complaint). If Plaintiff does not sign the amended complaint in

accordance with Rule 11, it will be stricken, along with the original complaint, and the

undersigned will recommend this action be dismissed.

Finally, the docket sheet reflects that Plaintiff has not filed the required conflict

disclosure form, although the Clerk of the Court notified him of this deficiency by letter

dated January 15, 2025, and provided him a copy of the relevant form. (Doc. No. 4.)

II. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is

GRANTED.

2. On or before February 11, 2025, Plaintiff shall file the required disclosure

statement. A template “Disclosure Statement” is available on the court's website at

https://www.almd.uscourts.gov/forms/conflict-disclosure-form-2024.

3. On or before February 11, 2025, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint that

complies with the following requirements:

a. To the extent possible, correctly names Defendant(s).

b. Sets out a short, plain statement of the facts on which Plaintiff bases his

claims. The amended complaint must specifically describe how Defendant

and its employees acted, or failed to act, in a manner that harmed Plaintiff,

not other patients.

c. Presents a short and plain statement of each claim showing Plaintiff is

entitled to relief and “give[s] the defendant fair notice of what the .. . claim

is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citation

omitted); Fed R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). The amended complaint should set out each

claim in a separately numbered count that specifies which law was allegedly

violated and reference specific allegations of fact that support each legal

claim. To the extent practicable, and for further clarity, Plaintiff should also

state when the alleged violations occurred.

d. Includes a Plaintiff’s signature in compliance with Rule 11(a) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure.

Plaintiff is advised that failure to timely file an amended complaint in compliance

with this Order may constitute grounds for dismissal for failure to prosecute this case

and for failure to comply with the court’s orders. Such dismissal may be with or without

prejudice. Plaintiff is further advised that his amended complaint will be subject to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) review.

DONE this 28th day of January, 2025.

Phin

raat T. ADAMS

ED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE