"the National Labor Relations Act does not permit the district court to exercise jurisdiction over the decision of the General Counsel of the NLRB to issue an unfair labor practice complaint"
How later courts described this case
- "the National Labor Relations Act does not permit the district court to exercise jurisdiction over the decision of the General Counsel of the NLRB to issue an unfair labor practice complaint"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
FILED
AUG 25 2010
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Courts for the District of Columbia
)
Joseph Slovinec, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
Civil Action No.
10 1430
Ronald Meisburg, )
)
Defendant. )
)
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 District of Columbia resident, sues the former General Counsel of the National
Labor Relations for allegedly influencing "Yvonne Dixon to write a letter of March 23, 2010
with false statements .... " CompI. at 1. The attached letter to which plaintiff objects was
written in response to his inquiry about appealing an adverse decision with regard to an alleged
unfair labor practice. The complaint provides no notice ofa claim or the basis ofthis Court's
jurisdiction. See Beverly Health and Rehabilitation Services, Inc. v. Feinstein, 103 F.3d 151,
153-54 (D.C. Cir. 1996) ("the National Labor Relations Act does not permit the district court to
exercise jurisdiction over the decision of the General Counsel of the NLRB to issue an unfair
labor practice complaint"). A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum
Opinion.
Date: August /...4-,2010
2