ROSSMANN v. LEADER et al, No. 1:2020cv01221 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Carl J. Nichols on 5/27/2020. (adh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
ROSSMANN v. LEADER et al Doc. 3 Case 1:20-cv-01221-UNA Document 3 Filed 05/27/20 Page 1 of 2 FILED 5/27/2020 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BRUD ROSSMANN, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-01221 (UNA) LENNERT LEADER, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter, brought pro se, is before the Court on review of Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF No. 1, and application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. 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) 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, 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 defendants receive fair notice of the claim being asserted so that they can prepare a responsive answer, launch 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). It also assists the Court in determining whether it has jurisdiction over the subject matter. Plaintiff is a District of Columbia resident who purports to sue various individuals, including a Judge and a Magistrate Judge of this Court, United States Attorney General William 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:20-cv-01221-UNA Document 3 Filed 05/27/20 Page 2 of 2 Barr, CIA Director Gina Haspel, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and former FBI Director James Comey. See generally Compl. Plaintiff also lists as defendants “Jews More Generally.” Id. The 329-paragraph pleading is essentially a non-conforming diatribe. Id. Complaints like this one, which are “excessively long, rambling, disjointed, incoherent, or full of irrelevant and confusing material will patently fail [Rule 8(a)’s] standard,” as will “a complaint that contains an untidy assortment of claims that are neither plainly nor concisely stated, nor meaningfully distinguished from bold conclusions, sharp harangues and personal comments.” Jiggetts v. District of Columbia, 319 F.R.D. 408, 413 (D.D.C. 2017), aff'd sub nom. Cooper v. District of Columbia, No. 17-7021, 2017 WL 5664737 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 1, 2017) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Therefore, this case will be dismissed. An Order will be released contemporaneously with this Memorandum Opinion. DATE: May 27, 2020 CARL J. NICHOLS United States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
