From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Long v. Alazar

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Sep 22, 2010
Civil Action No. 10 1603 (D.D.C. Sep. 22, 2010)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 10 1603.

September 22, 2010


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.

P ro 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 resident of Oxon Hill, Maryland, sues the Secretary of the Interior. The complaint, consisting of disjointed phrases, fails to provide any notice of a claim. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: September 14, 2010


Summaries of

Long v. Alazar

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Sep 22, 2010
Civil Action No. 10 1603 (D.D.C. Sep. 22, 2010)
Case details for

Long v. Alazar

Case Details

Full title:Karen F. Long, Plaintiff, v. Ken Salazar, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: Sep 22, 2010

Citations

Civil Action No. 10 1603 (D.D.C. Sep. 22, 2010)