The opinion of the court was delivered by: John D. Bates United States District Judge
This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion to dismiss. For the reasons discussed below, the motion will be granted.
On May 14, 2012, plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, the caption of which identifies the defendants as follows:
ATTN: Deputy Chief Director, Shannon Fulton RE: PHILLIP McHUGH 555 4th Street, N.W., Rm. 1205 Washington, DC 20530
Notice of Removal of a Civil Action, Ex. A (Complaint, Jordan v. U.S. Attorney's Office, No. 0004130-12 (D.C. Super. Ct. filed May 14, 2012) (emphasis in original)). In its entirety the complaint states:
Asking this Court to give me a "Restraining Order" due to this above individual participating with an assault, domestic, physical violence, and loss of earnings, due to injuries. Under violation code -- Title 18, 14, 8 Id., Ex. A (Complaint). Mention of the "above individual" presumably is a reference to Phillip McHugh, a Metropolitan Police Department ("MPD") officer. See Pl.'s Opp'n at 6.*fn1 Plaintiff demands damages of $25,000 and injunctive relief. Notice of Removal, Ex. A (Complaint).
Plaintiff also filed motions for injunctive relief, both of which alleged:
I am requesting a restraining order due to an assault, physical violence, domestic, and loss of earnings. I am asking for the individual to stay away from home, property assets, employment. He also remove vehicle.
Id., Ex. A (Motion -- (Pro -- Se) for TRO); see id., Ex. A (Motion -- (Pro -- Se) for PI). In support of her motion for a temporary restraining order, plaintiff accused McHugh of "an assault; forged reports and physical violence" in violation of her civil rights." Id., Ex. A (Motion -- (Pro -- Se) for TRO).
A. Dismissal Standard Under Rule 12(b)(6)
The United States Attorney's Office moves to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on the ground that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A motion under Rule 12(b)(6) tests the sufficiency of the complaint. See Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). "[T]he complaint is construed liberally in the plaintiff['s] favor, and [the Court] grant[s the] plaintiff the benefit of all inferences that can be derived from the facts alleged." Kowal v. MCI Comm'cns Corp., 16 F.3d 1271, 1276 (D.C. Cir. 1994). A complaint survives a motion under Rule 12(b)(6) only if it "contain[s] sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, __, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). A claim is facially plausible "when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw [a] reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Id. (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556 (2007)). "A complaint alleging facts which are merely consistent with a defendant's liability . . . stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief." Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557) (internal quotation marks omitted). A pro se complaint "must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings ...