### Derian Douglas Hickman, Plaintiff,


### v. NASA et aI., Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

# FILED DEC t. 

## 32009 Clerk, U.S. District and Bankruptcy Courts ) ) ) ) ) 

### ) Civil Action

## N{)9 

# 24U9 ) ) ) ) 

### ----------------------------) MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed a complaint and an applicationto proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed. Complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than are formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Nonetheless, pro
se plaintiffs must comply with the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8 ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure states the minimum requirements for complaints. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Rule 8(a) requires that a complaint contain a short and plain statement ofthe grounds upon which federaljurisdictionrests, a short and plain statement showing that the plaintiffis entitled to relief, and a demand forjudgmentfor the reliefsought. The minimum requirements Rule 8 imposes are designed to provide defendants with sufficient notice ofthe claim orclaims being asserted in order to allow defendants to prepare a responsive answer and an adequate defense, and to determine whetherthe doctrine of

resjudicataapplies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Further, compliance 

# 3with Rule 8(a)'srequirements should provide a court with sufficient informationto determine whether it hasjurisdiction overthe claims. In its entirety, this one-page pro se complaint againstNASA andthe Federal Aviation Administration states as follows: Requesting pilot license and aircraft information, private airport, ship dock license orregistrations. Also Discovery Shuttle information and United States patent filings and copyrights onthe name Discovery Shuttle and Discovery Channel, also Discover Card. Trademarks. Compensation for discrimination and lost business revenue. Compensation for property lost while awaiting court dates. Asking for jurytrial. 100 million dollars and property return. Complaint at 1 (punctuation and spelling altered). This complaintrepresents no more than a list ofdesires, and does not identify any claims being pursued. Indeed, it does notpresent any factual allegations that would support a claim against the defendants. Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed for failure to comply with the requirements ofRule 8. Plaintiffhas filed at leastten complaints this year, all ofwhich have been dismissed in screening because either the complaint is clearly frivolous and based on delusions ordoes not meet the minimum standards required as set froth in Rule 8. 1 The plaintiffis advised that ifhe persists in filing such complaints, this Court may restricthis abili to proceed in forma pauperis. A separate order accompanies this**memor'aI)!~~**

United States DistrictJudge

1 In addition to this one and another submitted onDecember 3,2009,plaintiffhas filed at least eight other complaints. See Civil ActionNos. 09-342,09-359,09-816,09-974,09-1071, 09-1362,09-1616,09-2251. - 2 -