# Hickman v. Alderson Court Transcripts Service for the Supreme Court

> District Court, District of Columbia · June 4, 2010

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2665827

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, District of Columbia
- **Decided:** June 4, 2010
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Judge Ellen S. Huvelle
- **Nature of suit:** Civil
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2665827

## Opinion text

FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
JUN - 4 2010
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Clerk. U.S. District &Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia

)
Derian Douglas Hickman, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
Civil Action No.
10 0922
Alderson Court Transcripts Service for the )
Supreme Court et aI., )
)
Defendants. )
----------------------------~)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed a complaint and an application to proceed in forma

pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed.

Complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than are formal

pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,520 (1972). Nonetheless, pro

se plaintiffs must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F.

Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states the

minimum requirements for complaints. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Rule 8(a) requires that a complaint

contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which federal jurisdiction rests, a short

and plain statement showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment for

the relief sought. The minimum requirements Rule 8 imposes are designed to provide defendants

with sufficient notice of the claim or claims being asserted in order to allow defendants to

prepare a responsive answer and 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). Further, compliance

N 3
with Rule 8(a)'s requirements should provide a court with sufficient information to determine

whether it has jurisdiction over the claims.

In its entirety, this one-page pro se complaint against six defendants, including the United

States Patent and Trademark Office, the "Derian Douglas Hickman Archives," and the "DC

Public Librarys" [sic], states as follows:

Above company and agencies withholding documents needed for verification of
previous business ownership, building ownership, payment, collection dependent
on verification of documents. Also withholding documents about private property
ownership needed to pay taxes. Also needed to collect royalty fees for trademark
or patent use or copy right use. Reference previous filings and attachments.
Asking for trial by jury. Requesting documents and amount due.

Complaint at 1 (punctuation and spelling altered). This complaint does not present any factual

allegations that would support a claim against the defendants named, and thus does not include a

"short and plain statement showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief," Rule 8, or provide the

defendants with sufficient notice ofthe claims against them. Accordingly, the complaint will be

dismissed with leave to amend for failure to comply with the requirements of Rule 8.

A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

Date: United States District Judge

-2-

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2665827. Public record. Not legal advice.