ORDER

JAMES C. FOX, Senior District Judge.

This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs "Verified Petition in the Nature of a Motion Pursuant to Writ for Discovery, Under Subpoena Duces Tecum, 42 U.S.C. § 1982, Maritime Tort Clams [sic] In-Admiralty." See [DE-6]. The filings of record reveal, inter alia, that the named plaintiff is deceased, and the lawsuit in fact is being prosecuted by a person named "Khufu-Sutukh: Ranub-El," who describes himself as "intervener, grantee (Exhibit 1) and trustee for the Plaintiff." Complaint [DE-3.1], p. 1. Specifically, the Complaint alleges, in pertinent part:

PARTIES TO ACTION

Id. p.4.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has explained, pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 17, a real party in interest is one who possesses the right to enforce the claim and has a significant interest in the litigation under North Carolina law. Virginia Elec. and Power Co. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 485 F.2d 78, 83 (4th Cir. 1973). Ms. Sampson does not have the right (or ability) to enforce any claims purportedly set forth in the Complaint, first, because she is alleged to be deceased, and secondly, because the Complaint alleges facts that suggest that Mr. Khufu-Sutukh: Ranub-EI, an heir of Ms. Sampson, is the real party in interest, as grantee of a North Carolina General Warranty Deed to the subject real property from "all [other] heirs" from the Estate of Shirley Sampson, grantees. See Complaint [DE-3], Exhibit 1, Attachment 1. If the intent of the Complaint is for the Estate of Shirley Rose Simpson to bring an action against the defendants, then an attorney must appear on behalf of the estate, in compliance with this district's Local Civil Rules, and must allege the factual bases for subject matter jurisdiction in this court.

While Mr. Khufu-Sutukh: Ranub-El's theories of liability are not clear, there are no allegations in the Complaint supporting admiralty or maritime jurisdiction, and no tort claim has been alleged. Most importantly, however, the deceased named plaintiff, "Shirley Rose Sampson," is not an entity who can initiate and maintain a lawsuit. See FED. R. CIV. P. 17(b). If Mr. Khufu-Sutukh: Ranub-EI seeks to prosecute a lawsuit in a cognizable representative capacity or on his own behalf, he must do so in accordance with governing substantive law, as well as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rules of this court.

Accordingly, all persons hereby are NOTIFIED that the court intends to dismiss this action for failure to prosecute by the real party in interest, unless, on or before March 30, 2012, a competent real party in interest shows cause, in writing, why naming a deceased person as the plaintiff/real party in interest was the result of an understandable mistake. See, e.g., Intown Properties Mgmt. Inc. v. Wheaton Van Lines, Inc., 271 F.3d 164, 171 (4th Cir. 2001) (finding that Rule 17(a) was inapplicable because the "mistake had not been `understandable'"). The response should be accompanied by a proposed amended complaint that conforms with requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules of this court. See FED. R. CIV. P. 17(a).1 If the proposed amended complaint seeks to substitute the proper real party in interest as the named plaintiff, the propriety of substitution under Rule 17(a) will be determined according to governing law.

The pending Motion for Writ of Discovery [DE-6] is DENIED without prejudice to renew, if appropriate.

SO ORDERED.