Opinion
Case: 1:16-cv-02135
10-24-2016
SHAUNDELLE DONTIA DIAL, Plaintiff, v. CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR., et al., Defendants.
Assigned To : Unassigned
Assign. Date : 10/25/2016
Description: Pro Se Gen. Civil (F Deck) MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint without prejudice.
The Court has reviewed the 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).
The complaint, as drafted, does not comply with Rule 8(a). Its language is so general that the Court cannot determine what claim or claims the plaintiff intends to bring against which defendant or defendants. The plaintiff identifies only one defendant by name, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., and Mr. Samuels no longer is the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The remaining defendants are identified by title or position, and the Court and the defendants are left to speculate as to the identities of the parties in this case. The Court therefore will dismiss the complaint without prejudice. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
/s/_________
United States District Judge DATE: 10/24/2016