• f'lNk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FILED
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AUG 19 2010
Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptq
ANTONIO COLBERT, ) Courts for the District of Columbi
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.
) 10 1402
U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court upon consideration of plaintiff s application to proceed in
forma pauperis and his pro se complaint. The application will be granted, and the complaint
will be dismissed.
Plaintiff brings this civil action against the United States Attorney's Office because of its
staffs "unwillingness to do their jobs," that is, to take plaintiffs complaints. CompI. at 2. He is
"only sueing [sic] for $10,000.00 dollars," id., and he appears to demand injunctive relief, see id.
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). Even pro 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 ofthe 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
jj If 1 1
prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to detennine whether the
doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
Plaintiffs complaint does not contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon
which the Court's jurisdiction depends or a claim that plaintiff is entitled to the relief he seeks.
For these reasons, the complaint will be dismissed for its failure to comply with Rule 8(a). An
Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
/;1 I 8...0 (0
DATE: ()U..u~ I ?--)