Opinion
9:06-CV-809 (FJS/RFT).
March 31, 2008
WOODROW FLEMMING, 03-A-5259, Upstate Correctional Facility, Malone, New York, Plaintiff pro se, OF COUNSEL.
MEGAN M. BROWN, AAG OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK, STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, The Capitol, Albany, New York, Attorneys for Defendants.
ORDER
In a Report-Recommendation and Order dated January 15, 2008, Magistrate Judge Treece recommended that this Court grant Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice. See Dkt. No. 59. In response to these recommendations, Plaintiff filed a document that he referred to as "Plaintiff Amend Complaint, Memoran of Law in Support of Rule 8(a), 34, 37, 56(c), Pursuant 56.1, 56.2, 1871, 1988 and 1985." See Dkt. No. 60. After reviewing that document, the Court determined that it would consider the document to constitute Plaintiff's objections to Magistrate Judge Treece's recommendations. See Text Order dated February 6, 2008.
As Magistrate Judge Treece noted, "Plaintiff's Complaint is illegible at certain points and unintelligible at others." See Dkt. No. 59 at 2 n. 2 (citation omitted). The same is true of Plaintiff's objections to Magistrate Judge Treece's recommendations. See, generally, Dkt. No. 60. Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed these objections carefully and has construed them to raise all arguments reasonably related to Plaintiff's claims and Magistrate Judge Treece's recommendations regarding the disposition of those claims.
In his objections, to the extent that the Court can decipher them, Plaintiff appears to make many of the same arguments that he made in opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss. The Court finds such objections without merit for the same reasons that Magistrate Judge Treece rejected those arguments in his Report-Recommendation and Order. Moreover, to the extent that Plaintiff is requesting leave to file an amended complaint, the Court denies that request based upon a review of his proposed amendments as futile. See Tocker v. Philip Morris Cos., Inc., 470 F.3d 481, 491 (2d Cir. 2006) (holding that "a motion for leave to amend a complaint may be denied when amendment would be futile" (citation omitted)).
The Court notes that, the document that Plaintiff filed entitled "Amend Complaint," see Dkt. No. 60, would be subject to dismissal as an amended pleading for a number of reasons, including the fact that it does not comply with Rules 8 and 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or this Court's Local Rules for such a pleading. Moreover, it suffers from the same deficiencies as Plaintiff's original complaint in that it does not state a claim upon which this Court can grant relief.
Accordingly, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Treece's January 15, 2008 Report-Recommendation and Order is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further
ORDERS that Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint is GRANTED and Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants and close this case.