Opinion
Civil Action No. 10 1409.
August 20, 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.
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 resident of Rahway, New Jersey, sues New Jersey-based defendants, including the United States District Court in Newark. He also sues the Social Security Administration ("SSA") in New York, New York. See Compl. Caption at 1-2. The complaint consists mostly of disjointed statements that fail to provide any notice of a claim. To the extent that plaintiff is seeking judicial review of an SSA determination, he must bring such an action "in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which [he] resides," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which is the District of New Jersey. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Date: August 12, 2010