Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia grants the pro se plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses the complaint without prejudice. The court concludes that the complaint fails to satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) because it does not provide a discernible claim, basis for jurisdiction, or requested relief.
Holdings
- The complaint failed to satisfy Rule 8(a) because it did not provide a short and plain statement identifying the grounds for jurisdiction or a claim showing that Plaintiff was entitled to relief.
- The action was subject to dismissal because Plaintiff failed to establish the court's subject matter jurisdiction.
Questions Presented
- Whether the complaint satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)'s requirements for a short and plain statement of the grounds for jurisdiction and of a claim showing entitlement to relief.
- Whether dismissal was required because the complaint failed to establish the court's subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3).
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (4)
- Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239–40 (D.D.C. 1987)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678–79 (2009)(cited)
- Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668–71 (D.C. Cir. 2004)(cited)
- Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977)(cited)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…