The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FE3 17 2011
Clerk, U S Dis .
) Courts for ihe D~~f/ &t Bankruptcy
Ie of COlumbia
Timothy W. Buchanan, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.
)
132 nd District Court of Texas et at., )
)
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).
3
Plaintiff, a Texas prisoner in Amarillo, sues a Texas state court there and four individuals
identified as a Judge, "D.A.," Clerk and Foreman. CompI. Caption. He seeks to "correct
indictments proir [sic] to trial, or $60 million dollars and I'll stay here." CompI. at 1. The
complaint fails to establish the basis of federal court jurisdiction and plaintiff s entitlement to
relief.! It therefore will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum
Opinion.
·iL
Qek)~-~
United States Distri t Judge
Date: February J[) ,2011
! To the extent that plaintiff is seeking to correct the state court's docket, his recourse
lies, if at all, in that court.
2