Opinion
Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-00707 (UNA)
04-11-2018
ROBERT HEARD Plaintiff, v. SENIOR JUDGES, Defendant.
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, 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, a resident of Gainesville, Georgia, has submitted a complaint. While his case caption appears to bring suit against a group of "Senior Judges," it also appears that the Plaintiff attempts to bring claims against a myriad of other entities and individuals within the body of the complaint (e.g., Larry Akin, Marty Allen, Regions Bank, Peach Street Bank, etc., see Plaintiff's complaint at ¶ 4). Plaintiff has filed in a civil complaint in which he seemingly alleges that various entities and individuals are withholding his property, but then requests some vague criminal redress by way of warrants. The random statements comprising the complaint fail to provide any notice of a claim and the basis of federal court jurisdiction. Therefore, this case will be dismissed. A separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. Date: 4/11/18
/s/_________
United States District Judge