Case Name: Sandi D. JACKSON, as next friend and parent of, Keely A. Jackson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Frank MIX, Susie Yonkers, Jeannie Cole, Amy Burke, Shannon Atkinson, Kim Wilson, Amy Nix, Keri Cress, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-06-09
Citations: 282 F. App'x 361
Docket Number: No. 07-6010
Parties: Sandi D. JACKSON, as next friend and parent of, Keely A. Jackson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Frank MIX, Susie Yonkers, Jeannie Cole, Amy Burke, Shannon Atkinson, Kim Wilson, Amy Nix, Keri Cress, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: KENNEDY and MARTIN, Circuit Judges, and HOOD, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 282
Pages: 361–362

Head Matter:
Sandi D. JACKSON, as next friend and parent of, Keely A. Jackson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Frank MIX, Susie Yonkers, Jeannie Cole, Amy Burke, Shannon Atkinson, Kim Wilson, Amy Nix, Keri Cress, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-6010.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
June 9, 2008.
Before: KENNEDY and MARTIN, Circuit Judges, and HOOD, District Judge.
The Honorable Joseph M. Hood, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
BOYCE F. MARTIN, JR., Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff Sandi Jackson alleges that defendants, individually and in concert with each other, violated her daughter Keely's constitutional rights. None of the factual allegations contained in her complaint, however, are linked with any specific defendant, and the complaint fails to address how defendants' actions were objectively unreasonable. Citing these failures, the district court gave Jackson twenty-one days to amend her complaint under Achterhof v. Selvaggio, 886 F.2d 826, 881 (6th Cir.1989) (if a plaintiff fails to allege sufficient factual allegations necessary to sustain his § 1983 action, a court must accord the plaintiff an additional opportunity to come forward with such allegations). Instead of curing the problem, Jackson's second complaint simply re-alleges that "all of the defendants participated in violating her substantive due process rights by committing several unconstitutional acts." This is not specific enough to sustain her claim, and the defendants are thus entitled to a dismissal of the complaint under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted). We thus AFFIRM the holding of the district court.