Opinion
Civil Action No. 14-1939 (UNA)
12-12-2014
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter, transferred from the Southern District of New York, is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff's pro se complaint and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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.
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 complaints to contain "(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, . . . (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief[,] [and] (3) a demand for the relief sought[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). The Rule 8 standard ensures that defendants receive fair notice of the claim being asserted so that they can prepare a responsive answer and 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).
Plaintiff is a resident of Fayetteville, Georgia. In the Statement of the Claim section of the form Complaint, plaintiff lists the District of Columbia as the location giving rise to the claim and writes "Malicious prosecution." Compl. at 3. Despite that the form contains suggested questions as guidance, see id. at 3, plaintiff states no facts in support of his claim. In the Relief section, plaintiff writes "Time Management." Id. at 4. Such cryptic references fail to provide adequate notice of a claim. Hence, this case will be dismissed without prejudice to plaintiff filing an amended complaint that complies with Rule 8. Date: December 12, 2014
/s/_________
United States District Judge