From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Idrogo v. Foxx

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Oct 18, 2013
Civil Action No. 13-1662 (D.D.C. Oct. 18, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 13-1662

10-18-2013

Michael Idrogo, Plaintiff, v. Anthony Foxx et al., Defendants.


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 is a Texas resident. He purports to sue U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx, certain members of Congress, and other individuals. See Compl. Caption. The cryptic statements comprising the complaint provide no notice of claim or a basis for federal court jurisdiction and, thus, fail to comply with Rule 8(a). A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

____________

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Idrogo v. Foxx

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Oct 18, 2013
Civil Action No. 13-1662 (D.D.C. Oct. 18, 2013)
Case details for

Idrogo v. Foxx

Case Details

Full title:Michael Idrogo, Plaintiff, v. Anthony Foxx et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Date published: Oct 18, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No. 13-1662 (D.D.C. Oct. 18, 2013)