Mykonos v. United States
This text of Mykonos v. United States (Mykonos 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.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STEPHANIE MYKONOS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 1:26-cv-01597 (UNA) ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed a Complaint (“Compl.”), ECF No. 1, and an
Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), ECF No. 2. The Court grants
Plaintiff’s IFP Application, and for the reasons discussed below, it dismisses this matter without
prejudice.
Plaintiff, a resident of the District, sues the United States. See Compl. at 1–2. The
Complaint is vague and sparse. Plaintiff asks the Court to, “as a matter of principle,” enforce “Rule
#38 on the disable’s view of public-facing-PACER filings . . . as PDF/JPG by April, 2026 Fed.
Deadline.” See id. at 3–4. No other supporting facts or context is provided.
Pro se litigants must comply with the Federal and Local Rules of Civil Procedure. See
Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239–40 (D.D.C. 1987). Federal Rule 8(a) requires a complaint
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 U.S. 662, 678–79 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-
71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). The Rule 8 standard ensures that respondents 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. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
Here, Plaintiff’s bare and ambiguous allegations fall well short of providing sufficient notice of
any claim.
Accordingly, the Court dismisses the Complaint, and this matter, without prejudice. An
Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
Date: June 16, 2026
Tanya S. Chutkan TANYA S. CHUTKAN United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Mykonos v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mykonos-v-united-states-dcd-2026.