The opinion
FILED
LJNnED sTArEs DISTRICT count my g 1 2014
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Ghlk. U.S. D|s\rlct & Bankniplcy
Gourtlforma D|smct of Culunib|a
En'c Houston,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Aetion No. 14-0641 (UNA)
Mary D. Andrea et al.,
Defendants.
\¢_/\_/\_/\é\_/\\J\q.¢/\_/§/\_/
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiffs pro se Complaint and
application to proceed in forma pauperis The C0urt will grant the in forma pauperis application
and dismiss the case because the complaint fails to meet the minimal pleading requirements of
Rule S(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 S(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires
complaints to contain "(l) 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. S(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009); Ci`ralsky v. CIA, 355
F.3d 66l, 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. Calrfano, 75
F.R.D. 497,493(1).1).<:_ 1977).
Plaintiff is a prisoner at the United States Penitentiary in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. I-Ie
sues two individuals who may work at a federal court in Williarnsport, Pennyslvania. See
Compl. Caption (listing defendants’ address as "US Courthouse Suites"). Plaintiff demands
damages exceeding $ l.l million, see Compl. at 5, but the complaint consists of incoherent
statements that do not implicate the named defendants in any wrongdoing Hence, this case will
be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Ze// f //‘//1/¢%
pt Uhited states r)istri¢t Judge
Date: May ,2014