United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HERNDON, District Judge
before the Court is defendants St. Clair County, Debra Moore,
and Frank Bergman's June 29, 2017, motion to strike
plaintiff's complaint as untimely or, in the alternative,
to dismiss plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a
claim (Doc. 31). As of today's date, plaintiff has not
filed a response to the motion. For the reasons explained
below, the Court GRANTS defendant's motion to dismiss
December 19, 2016, Plaintiff Roshanda Peppers, a former
employee of St. Clair County, initially filed a complaint
against St. Clair County and two St. Clair County
employees-Debra Moore and Frank Bergmann-claiming
“Antidiscrimination et al., whistleblower et al., ADA
et al., any and all federal and state law and Right to
Sue.” (Doc. 1, pg. 4). Based the lack of specificity in
plaintiff's claims against each named defendant, the
defendants filed a motion for a more definite statement (Doc.
18), and on August 9, 2017, the Court ordered plaintiff to
file an amended complaint on or before August 24, 2017, that
specifically identified plaintiff's claims against each
defendant and the facts upon which those claims are based
(Doc. 27). On August 25, 2017-one day after the Court's
deadline-plaintiff filed her first amended complaint. In the
amended complaint plaintiff asserts more than 20 different
claims against some, or all, of the defendants. Not only did
she fail to amend her complaint in a timely fashion, but she
also failed to comply with the Court's directives as to
the substance of her complaint. As a result, defendants moved
to strike plaintiff's complaint as untimely or, in the
alternative, dismiss plaintiff's complaint for failure to
state a claim (Doc. 31). Plaintiff has not responded to the
Motion to Dismiss
12(b)(6) permits a motion to dismiss a complaint for failure
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Hallinan v. Fraternal Order of Police Chicago Lodge No.
7, 570 F.3d 811, 820 (7th Cir. 2009). The Supreme Court
explained in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 570 (2007), that Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal is
warranted if the complaint fails to set forth “enough
facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
federal pleading standards were retooled by Twombly
and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), notice
pleading remains all that is required in a complaint.
“A plaintiff still must provide only ‘enough
detail to give the defendant fair notice of what the claim is
and the grounds upon which it rests and, through his
allegations, show that it is plausible, rather than merely
speculative, that he is entitled to relief.'”
Tamayo v. Blagojevich, 526 F.3d 1074, 1083 (7th Cir.
2008) (citation omitted).
Seventh Circuit offers further guidance on what a complaint
must do to withstand 12(b)(6) dismissal. The Court in
Pugh v. Tribune Co., 521 F.3d 686, 699 (7th Cir.
2008), reiterated the standard: “surviving a Rule
12(b)(6) motion requires more than labels and
conclusions;” the complaint's allegations must
“raise a right to relief above the speculative
level.” A plaintiff's claim “must be
plausible on its face, ” that is, “the complaint
must establish a non-negligible probability that the claim is
valid.” Smith v. Medical Benefit Administrators
Group, Inc., 639 F.3d 277, 281 (7th Cir.2011). With this
in mind, the Court turns to plaintiff's complaint
today's date, plaintiff has not responded to the motion
to dismiss. Local Rule 7.1(c) provides in part that:
“Failure to timely file a response to a motion may, in
the Court's discretion, be considered an admission of the
merits of the motion.” Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c),
the Court considers plaintiff's failure to respond as an
admission of the merits of the motion to dismiss.
Accordingly, the Court grants defendant's motion to
the Court finds that dismissal is appropriate, given that
plaintiff failed comply with the Court's August 9, 2017
Order (Doc. 27).
plaintiff failed to comply with the Court-ordered deadline in
which to amend her complaint, and she also failed to identify
her claims and the facts supporting those claims in a way
that would withstand 12(b)(6) dismissal, as the August 9,
2017 Order ...