FILED

¥§§TF§ES§§`SY§§Y§S§§§;%§§§’}§‘T§ G'e~<» 315 l»»§-ii§'§"'
Courts for the Dlstrict afa
William Patrick-Bey, )
Plaintiff, §
v. § Civil Action N0. /*§£"" ‘§L
U.S. Government, §
Defendant. §

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff s pro se Complaint
application 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 "(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, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355
F.3d 66l, 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. l977).

Plaintiff, a resident of Arlington, Virginia, sues the "U.S. Government," but he has made
no factual allegations against the United States. See Compl. at 1 ("Catholic Charities, a
subsidiary of Hillcrest Children and Family Center and also the phyc [sic] ward at Southeast
Community Hospital have all attempt[ed] to assault me by way of poison medication."). Since
the complaint provides no notice of a claim against the only named defendant, it will be

dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

United States District Judge

 

Date: March

