From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Espino v. U.S. Department of Justice

United States District Court, D. Columbia
May 16, 2011
Civil Action No. 11 0909 (D.D.C. May. 16, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11 0909.

May 16, 2011


MEMORANDUM OPINION


This matter 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 [and] (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (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, a prisoner at the United States Penitentiary Hazelton in Bruceton Mills, West Virginia, alleges that since October 20, 2009, he has requested "under the Federal Prisoners . . . Freedom of Information Act . . . the results of the [DNA] testing done in Case Number # F 4313-1998" in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Compl. at 6 (brackets in original). He names as the sole defendant the Department of Justice. The federal district court's FOIA jurisdiction extends to claims arising from an agency's improper withholding of records requested in accordance with agency rules. See 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(a)(3)(A), (4)(B)(1); McGehee v. CIA, 697 F.2d 1095, 1105 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (quoting Kissinger v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 445 U.S. 136, 150 (1980)). The instant complaint neither references a FOIA request number nor contains any other information, e.g., a copy of the actual request allegedly submitted to DOJ, from which a FOIA request may be reasonably identified. It therefore fails to provide adequate notice of a claim and grounds for federal court jurisdiction. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: May 12, 2011


Summaries of

Espino v. U.S. Department of Justice

United States District Court, D. Columbia
May 16, 2011
Civil Action No. 11 0909 (D.D.C. May. 16, 2011)
Case details for

Espino v. U.S. Department of Justice

Case Details

Full title:Carlos Espino, Plaintiff, v. U.S. Department of Justice, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: May 16, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 11 0909 (D.D.C. May. 16, 2011)