Mohammed Bey v. Cube Smart

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: February 9, 2012
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2012-0212
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED sTATEs Dlsrt

) FEB - 9 2012 ci ~ - /§:§:lld/>]~Sy.arlzlr\ilt:>t§t;ned Bey a.k.a. § @<,3,'§ li;;°'zh‘§'?§{;?l§ §?'é'§,lll’.§§la Plaintiff, § v. § Civil Action No. 0 Cube Smart, formerly known as, U-Store-II,§ Defendant. § ) 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 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. jarrell v. Tz`sch, 656 F. Supp. 23 7, 239 (D.D.C. l987). Rule S(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires complaints to contain "(l) 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, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 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. Calz'j"ano, 75

F.R.o. 497, 498 (D.o.c. 1977).

Plaintiff is a District of Columbia resident suing a District of Columbia business. See Case Caption. The complaint consists of rambling statements that fail to provide any notice of a

claim or the basis of federal court jurisdiction. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this

Memorandum Opinion. g

limited Statds District Judge Date: February , 2012