United States District Court, District of Columbia
This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis with his pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint.
The Court has reviewed plaintiffs complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Evenpro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F.Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court's jurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). The purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare 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).
Generally, the plaintiff attributes to the Departments of Justice and Defense, among other federal government entities, various wrongful acts, see Compl. at 1-2, such as "Interference with Employment, Kidnapping, Extortion, Blackmail, Stalking, Interference with Administrative or Court proceedings, Illegal defamation, Illegal Interference with Mail and Wire transmission, Illegal Impersonation of Federal Officers and Scheme's associated with it, " id. at 9. He demands a declaratory judgment and criminal prosecution of the defendants, among other relief. See Id. Wholly absent from the complaint is any statement showing that the plaintiff is entitled to a judgment in his favor or any form of ...