Opinion
Civil Action No. 20-2498 (UNA)
09-21-2020
THOMAS L. BAILEY, Plaintiff, v. FRANK BISHOP et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff's pro se complaint, ECF No. 1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. The Court will grant the in forma pauperis application and dismiss the case because the complaint fails to meet the minimal pleading requirements of Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
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). Still, pro se litigants 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). This standard aims to give fair notice to each defendant of the claims being asserted sufficiently to prepare a responsive answer, mount an adequate defense, and determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). It also assists the court in determining whether it has jurisdiction over the subject matter.
Plaintiff is a Maryland state prisoner who appears to challenge his 1994 Maryland conviction, "State of Md. v. Thomas L. Bailey." Compl., ECF No 1 at 1. The complaint contains no discernible allegations of fact, and such challenges are typically the province of the court of conviction. Therefore, this case will be dismissed. A separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/_________
RUDOLPH CONTRERAS
United States District Judge Date: September 21, 2020