Carrillo v. United States

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedJune 22, 2015
DocketCivil Action No. 2015-0956
StatusPublished

This text of Carrillo v. United States (Carrillo v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Carrillo v. United States, (D.D.C. 2015).

Opinion

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUN 2 2 2015

Clerk, U.S. District 8. Bankruptcy FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Courts for the District of Columbia

Fernando L. Carrillo, ) ) Plaintiff’ ) Case: 1:15—cv—00956 Jury Demand ) Assigned To : Unassigned V' ) Assign. Date: 6/22/2015 . i ) Description: Pro Se Gen. CIVII (F Deck) The United States of America, ) ) Defendant. ) W

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

Pro se litigants 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 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. Iqbal, 556 US. 662, 678-79 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (DC. 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. Califarzo, 75

F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

Plaintiff is incarcerated at the Pueblo County Jail in Pueblo, Colorado. He claims to be a Professional Entertainer and seeks $2 million in damages from the United States. The wide- ranging statements comprising the complaint provide no notice of a claim. A separate order of

dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

,3 1 United States Distrlct Judge

Date: June ,2015

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ciralsky v. Central Intelligence Agency
355 F.3d 661 (D.C. Circuit, 2004)
Jarrell v. Tisch
656 F. Supp. 237 (District of Columbia, 1987)
Brown v. Califano
75 F.R.D. 497 (District of Columbia, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Carrillo v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carrillo-v-united-states-dcd-2015.