WILLIAMSON v. CLINTON

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Reggie B. Walton on 10/15/2012. (ls, )

FILED
OCT 2 3 2012
Clark, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

RA YNEKA WILLIAMSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
HILLARY CLINTON,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No.

12 1728

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiffs application to proceed in forma
pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the

complaint.
The Court has reviewed plaintiffs complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro
'

'

'

'

se Jitigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by

lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even prose litigants, however, must
comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239
(D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint
contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends, a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand
for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The purpose of the minimum
standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim being asserted, sufficient to
prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the doctrine
of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497,498 (D.D.C. 1977).

The complaint is so incoherently written that the Court discerns no viable claim against the
named defendant within this Court's subject matter jurisdiction and no clear statement showing
plaintiffs entitlement to the relief she seeks. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the complaint.
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

2