Slafka v. LNU

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:21-cv-428-FDW-DSC MICHAEL SLAFKA, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ORDER ) FNU LNU, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte following review of the Complaint (Doc.

No. 1).

The Court advises Plaintiffs, who are proceeding pro se, the Court intends to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds of immunity and/or for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Robertson v. Anderson Mill Elem. Sch., 989 F.3d 282, 290-91 (4th Cir. 2021) (district courts may dismiss a complaint sua sponte after the party whose complaint stands to be dismissed is afforded notice and the opportunity to amend or otherwise respond). The Court advises Plaintiffs that failure to file a sufficient Amended Complaint within 30 days of this Order will result in the dismissal of this action without further notice. The Clerk of Court will be instructed not to issue any summonses or subpoenas in this case until specifically ordered to do so by the Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiffs shall file a sufficient Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of this Order. The failure to timely comply will result in this action’s dismissal without further notice.

2. The Clerk of Court is respectfully instructed not to issue any summonses or subpoenas in this case until specifically ordered to do so by the Court.

Signed: August 18, 2021 Frank D. Whitney é ¥ United States District Judge Begs