Opinion
Civil Action 24-1423 (UNA)
06-20-2024
JEAN PAUL GAMARRA, Plaintiff, v. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
TIMOTHY J. KELLY, United States District Judge
This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2), his pro se complaint (ECF No. 1) and motion for leave to file document under seal (ECF No. 3). The Court GRANTS the application, DISMISSES the complaint, and denies the motion.
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 claims 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 Court finds that the complaint is incomprehensible. It does not appear to state the grounds upon which this court's jurisdiction depends, or a statement of a cognizable claim showing plaintiff's entitlement to relief, or a demand for a particular form of relief. As drafted, the complaint fails to comply with Rule 8(a) and therefore it will be dismissed. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.