Thomas v. Doleshal et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
TONY B. THOMAS,
Plaintiff,
v. 	CASE NO. 25-3270-JWL
NATHAN DOLESHAL, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff and state prisoner Tony B. Thomas filed this pro se civil action under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 claiming his constitutional rights were violated by the named Defendants. (Doc. 1.)
Because Plaintiff is a prisoner and proceeds in forma pauperis, the Court conducted the statutorily
required screening of Plaintiff’s complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) and (b) and 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B). On December 19, 2025, the Court issued a memorandum and order (“M&O”)
setting forth the screening standards and identifying deficiencies in the complaint that left this
matter subject to dismissal in its entirety. (Doc. 4.)
Specifically, the M&O explained that the complaint failed to sufficiently allege that
Defendants 	Carney, 	Farkes, 	Navarro, 	Pleshka, 	and 	Twitchel 	personally 	participated 	in 	a
constitutional violation. Id. at 4-5. It also explained that each of the three Counts brought in the
complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief. Id. at 5-10. The Court granted Plaintiff to and
including January 20, 2026 in which to file a complete and proper amended complaint on the
required court-approved form that states a plausible claim for relief against a Defendant. Id. at 10-
11. Plaintiff was expressly cautioned that if he “fails to timely file an amended complaint, the
Case 5:25-cv-03270-JWL Document 6 Filed 02/02/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Court will proceed on the current complaint, which will be dismissed for the reasons stated herein
without further prior notice to Plaintiff.” Id. at 10.
The deadline for Plaintiff to file his amended complaint has now passed and the Court has
received no amended complaint from Plaintiff. Accordingly, this matter will be dismissed for
failure to state a claim. As explained in the M&O, Count III will be dismissed with prejudice and
Counts I and II will be dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT that this matter is dismissed for
failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Counts I and II are dismissed without
prejudice and Count III is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated February 2, 2026, in Kansas City, Kansas.
S/ John W. Lungstrum
JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 5:25-cv-03270-JWL Document 6 Filed 02/02/26 Page 2 of 2