The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MATTHEW ROBERT ELMORE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 25-2256 (UNA)
)
LONG BEACH POST OFFICE, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma
pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court GRANTS the application and, for the reasons
stated below, DISMISSES the complaint and this civil action without prejudice.
The Court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro
se litigants are held to less stringent standards than are applied to formal pleadings drafted by
lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even 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 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 claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer,
to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the doctrine of res
judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
1
Plaintiff alleges there are “no guards” at a Post Office in Long Beach, California, Compl.
at 3, and staff there “don[’]t electronically scan [his] Id [sic],” id. at 4. These meager assertions
fall short of the minimal pleading standard set forth in Rule 8(a), and therefore, the complaint will
be dismissed.
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
DATE: December 31, 2025 /s/
ANA C. REYES
United States District Judge
2