Opinion ID: 767677
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Armstrong v. Rushing

Text: 68 In total, there were five Armstrong requirements designed to protect the pro se litigant from dismissal of his complaint:(1) process issued and served, (2) notice of any motion thereafter made by defendant or the court to dismiss the complaint and the grounds therefor, (3) an opportunity to at least submit a written memoran dum in opposition to such motion, (4) in the event of dismissal, a statement of the grounds therefor, and (5) an opportunity to amend the complaint to over come the deficiency unless it clearly appears from the complaint that the deficiency cannot be over come by amendment. 69 352 F.2d at 837. We found these protections necessary because the pro se litigant is far more prone to making errors in pleading than the person who benefits from counsel and needs assistance in navigating through the process. See Noll, 809 F.2d at 1448. 2 The primary beneficiaries of the Armstrong protections were pro se litigants proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP).