Opinion ID: 1425563
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Procedural due process violations

Text: The district court also found that S.S.'s complaint did not allege a violation of his procedural due process rights. S.S. never amended his complaint in order to assert such a claim, and instead argues on appeal that his allegation of an `immediate' suspension states a claim for deprivation of protected interests without the minimum procedures due him. Our review of S.S.'s complaint reveals that the district court properly determined that the complaint lacked any allegation of a procedural due process violation. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a) (providing that a complaint must contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief). We therefore decline to address the merits of S.S.'s procedural due process argument and affirm the district court's dismissal of that claim.