Kevin Christopher Adams filed a complaint in district court against Montgomery County, various judiciary employees, and county and state officials and departments, on August 14, 2020. On September 3, 2020, the district court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) and directed the Clerk to close the case. The next day, Adams attempted to file another complaint. This second complaint was not accepted for filing, but was returned to Adams with a notation stating, “[t]he Complaint was previously received on 8/14/2020 and was dismissed on 9/3/20.” On September 14, 2020, Adams appealed the September 3 dismissal. He later attempted to file motions in the district court; the court did not accept the motions for filing and returned the documents to Adams.
On appeal, Adams does not directly challenge the district courts order dismissing his complaint without prejudice under Rule 8(a). Instead, he challenges only the courts subsequent failure to file his second complaint and his motions in the dismissed case. The district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to file the complaint, which still failed to comply with Rule 8(a)’s requirement of a short and plain statement of his claims. See, e.g., Turner v. United States, 736 F.3d 274, 283 (4th Cir. 2013) (“We review a district courts decisions pertaining to the management of its own docket under an abuse of discretion standard.”). Because the dismissal was without prejudice, if there are substantive differences in his second complaint or other circumstances would justify it, Adams may be able to file his second complaint as a new action in district court. On this subject we offer no opinion.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.