Opinion
Civil Action No. 08 1130.
June 19, 2008
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on consideration of plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se complaint. For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant the application and will dismiss the complaint.
The Court has reviewed plaintiff's complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). The purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
As drafted, the Count cannot discern plaintiff's claim or claims. Plaintiff states that she is "sueing [sic] for sinful money (999 trillion of SIN)," Compl. at 1, yet fails to identify the defendant or defendants liable for such damages. Plaintiff does not state a basis for this Court's jurisdiction and includes no short and plain statement showing her entitlement to relief.
For these reasons, the complaint will be dismissed for its failure to comply with Rule 8(a). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.