UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1653
EMMANUEL KWAME BOATENG,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
FAIRFAX POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:12-cv-00055-TSE-TRJ)
Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: November 2, 2012
Before KING and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Emmanuel Kwame Boateng, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Rogers
Jacewicz, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Fairfax, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Emmanuel Kwame Boateng appeals the district court’s
order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint with
prejudice. Upon our review, we affirm.
In the district court, the defendant moved to dismiss
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a
claim. Boateng was given notice, at his address of record, of a
hearing on the motion to dismiss, and was provided proper notice
pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975).
However, he did not appear at the hearing. The district court
reviewed the record and concluded that Boateng failed to state a
claim. The court found, however, that Boateng could potentially
state a claim if given the opportunity to re-plead against the
actual officers involved in the arrest, none of whom were named
as party defendants. Further, the court observed that Boateng
could plead additional facts supporting municipal liability.
Accordingly, the court encouraged Boateng to obtain counsel.
The court granted the motion to dismiss without prejudice, and
granted Boateng leave to file an amended complaint no later than
5:00 p.m. Wednesday March 21, 2012. The court expressly stated
that if Boateng failed to file an amended complaint on or before
that time, an order would issue dismissing his action with
prejudice and placing the matter among the ended causes.
2
On March 22, 2012, the district court dismissed the
complaint with prejudice because Boateng did not file an amended
complaint. Accordingly, as Boateng was given ample notice and
opportunity to amend his complaint, we affirm the court’s
dismissal of his complaint with prejudice. See Boateng v.
Fairfax Police Dep’t, No. 1:12-cv-00055-TSE-TRJ (E.D. Va.
Mar. 22, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3