Pickering-George v. Attorney General of the United States
Opinion
In|
FILED
SEP 0 7 2010 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT C|erk, U.S. Distr;¢t and FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA B¢nk|'|l¢>tcy Courts
JOHN T. PICKERlNG-GEORGE, ) )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. § Civil Acti0n No. / 0 __ /5'07
ATTORNEY GENERAL ) OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., ) )
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINInN This matter comes before the C0urt on review of plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint The C0urt will grant the applicati0n, and dismiss the
complaint.
doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Calzfano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
l
lt appears that plaintiff has submitted documents to the Attomey General, among other federal government officials, and that he has not received a response to his submission. He now claims an entitlement to damages of $45,000 plus an award of attomey fees and costs. The nature of the documents plaintiff submitted is not clear, and the complaint does not articulate a basis for plaintiff’ s demand for relief. Nor is the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction stated in the complaint. F or these reasons, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for its failure to
comply with Rule S(a). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued
rap/le
Unité¢{ States Distr`ict Judge
separately.
_ z ¢D DATE. [L?,,./V 5/7 ”
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Pickering-George v. Attorney General of the United States (Pickering-George v. Attorney General of the United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.