Opinion
Civil Action No. 19-3208 (UNA)
11-08-2019
VINCENT C. TEN-HOOPEN, Plaintiff, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint.
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 such that they can prepare a responsive answer, prepare 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).
The plaintiff's complaint, which is barely legible, purports to demand monetary compensation for acts committed by a hospital and the U.S. Department of Transportation. The complaint does not identify the basis for this Court's subject matter jurisdiction and it fails to contain a statement showing that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief he seeks from the named defendants. As drafted, the complaint fails to comply with Rule 8(a) and therefore it will be dismissed without prejudice.
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. DATE: November 8, 2019
/s/_________
TANYA S. CHUTKAN
United States District Judge