Riethmiller v. United States

(\4\

FILED

AUG " 2 2012

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Clerk, U.S. District_& Bankruptcy ` F@R THE DISTRICT ()F C()LL;MB]A Courts for the Dlstnct of Co|umb|a )

Annamarie D. Reithmiller, ) )

Plaintiff, ) ) ¢ ‘ . "" v. ) Civil Action No. l )

The United States el al,, ) )

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 S(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Pro se litigants must comply with the F ederal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. l987). 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. lqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Ciralsky 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. Calzfano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

Plaintiff is a resident of Bradenton, Florida, suing the United States, President Barack Obama as "the Executive of the United States of America," and the Republic of South Africa. The complaint is verbose but mostly incoherent. Since the complaint provides no notice of a claim nor a basis for exercising federal court jurisdiction, it will be dismissed. A separate Order of accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. lrrr;r:§- f v un`rr@d sr res orsrrrr~.r Jrrdge \/w

Date: July ZU' ,2012