IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02189-BNB
Dwayne Jones
Prisoner No. 119812
Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility
PO Box 1000
Crowley, CO 81034

| hereby certify that | have mailed a copy of the ORDER to the above-named
individuals on September 16, 2011.

GREGORY C. LANGHAM, CLERK

Y’Deputy Clerk


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02189-BNB

DWAYNE JONES, snurea ia 1 L
'S Di
Plaintif, DENVER, COLORAnG OE
Vv. SEP 16 201
J. GRAYSON ROBINSON, GREGORY C. LANGHAM
DAVE WALCHER, and CLERK

DR. ERWIN MOZER, N.D.,
Defendants.

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Dwayne Jones, is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado Department
of Corrections who currently is incarcerated at the Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility
in Crowley, Colorado. He initiated this pro se action by filing a prisoner complaint
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, among other statutes. He has been granted leave to
proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

The Court must construe Mr. Jones's filings liberally because he is a pro se
litigant. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935
F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). However, the Court should not act as a pro se
litigant’s advocate. See Hall, 935 F.2d at 1110. For the reasons stated below, Mr.
Jones will be ordered to file an amended complaint that asserts how each named party
violated his constitutional rights.

Mr. Jones must assert personal participation by each named defendant. See


Bennett v. Passic, 545 F.2d 1260, 1262-63 (10th Cir. 1976). To establish personal
participation, Mr. Jones must name and show how each individual caused the
deprivation of a federal right. See Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 166 (1985).
There must be an affirmative link between the alleged constitutional violation and each
defendant's participation, control or direction, or failure to supervise. See Butler v. City
of Norman, 992 F.2d 1053, 1055 (10th Cir. 1993). A defendant may not be held liable
on a theory of respondeat superior merely because of his or her supervisory position.
See Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469, 479 (1986); McKee v. Heggy, 703
F.2d 479, 483 (10th Cir. 1983). A supervisor is only liable for constitutional violations
that he or she causes. See Dodds v. Richardson, 614 F.3d 1185, 1211 (10th Cir.
2010). To state a claim in federal court, Mr. Jones must explain in his amended
complaint what each defendant did to him, when the defendant did the action, how the
action harmed him, and what specific legal right he believes the defendant violated.
Nasious v. Two Unknown B.1.C.E. Agents, 492 F.3d 1158, 1163 (10th Cir. 2007).
The amended complaint Mr. Jones will be directed to file must comply with the
pleading requirements of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The twin
purposes of a complaint are to give the opposing parties fair notice of the basis for the
claims against them so that they may respond and to allow the Court to conclude that
the allegations, if proven, show that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. See Monument
Builders of Greater Kansas City, Inc. v. American Cemetery Ass’n of Kansas, 891
F.2d 1473, 1480 (10th Cir. 1989). The requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 are designed

to meet these purposes. See TV Communications Network, Inc. v. ESPN, Inc., 767


F. Supp. 1062, 1069 (D. Colo. 1991), aff'd, 964 F.2d 1022 (10th Cir. 1992). Rule 8(a)
provides that a complaint “must contain (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds
for the court's jurisdiction, . . . (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that
the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for the relief sought.” The philosophy
of Rule 8(a) is reinforced by Rule 8(d)(1), which provides that “[e]ach allegation must be
simple, concise, and direct.” Taken together, Rules 8(a) and (d)(1) underscore the
emphasis placed on clarity and brevity by the federal pleading rules. Prolix, vague, or
unintelligible pleadings violate Rule 8.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Plaintiff, Dwayne Jones, file within thirty days from the date of
this order an amended complaint that complies with the instant order. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Jones shall obtain the Court-approved Prisoner
Complaint form (with the assistance of his case manager or the facility's legal assistant),
along with the applicable instructions, at www.cod uscourts.gov. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that if Mr. Jones fails within the time allowed to file an
amended prisoner complaint that complies with this order to the Court’s satisfaction, the

complaint and the action will be dismissed without further notice.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 16" day of September, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

S/Craig B. Shaffer
Craig B. Shaffer

United States Magistrate Judge