Tiburicio v. Obama

Opinion

FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUN 2 1 2011 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, u.s. Dls1rlct & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia

Seidy M. Tiburcio, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 11 114~ ) Barack Obama, ) ) 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 injorma 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, 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. Califano, 75

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

I \~ I --- ... _.._-----_............. _--_.

Plaintiff has filed a complaint and a bulky attachment consisting mostly of medical

records. She states that she wants President Barack Obama to "stop the professional-MD-Dr and

polisa [] hospital to damages mi," and appears to be complaining about the health care system in

Massachusetts. The complaint reveals no cognizable claim or a basis for federal court

jurisdiction. It therefore will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum

Opinion.

I ~~Z Date: June _ _ ,2011