Court Opinion

ID: 9391266
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-01 18:01:02.641741+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:40.446423
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                             FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ROBERT B. BRIDGES,                            )
                                              )
               Plaintiff,                     )
                                              )      Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-01068 (UNA)
       v.                                     )
                                              )
DONALD J. TRUMP,                              )
                                              )
                Defendant.                    )

                                 MEMORANDUM OPINION

       This matter is before the court on its initial review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint, ECF No.

1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), ECF No. 2. The court will grant

plaintiff’s application to proceed IFP 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.

       Plaintiff, a resident of Lexington, Kentucky, sues former President Donald Trump,

although any connection between plaintiff’s intended claims and President Trump are unclear.

Indeed, it is unknown what claims, if any, plaintiff is attempting to raise in this matter. His one-

page complaint states only that “Horn Law Office,” located in Des Moines, Iowa, sent him an

email regarding a “deferred prosecution order” in a traffic case brought against him, and about the

forthcoming dismissal of the underlying traffic ticket. No other information is provided.

       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, 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 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).

       Plaintiff’s complaint fails entirely to provide adequate notice of any claim. Plaintiff does

not specify any: cause of action, supporting legal authority, alleged wrongdoing––committed by

the defendant or by anyone else, damages incurred, or relief sought. The complaint also fails to

establish this court’s jurisdiction or venue. Therefore, this case must be dismissed without

prejudice. A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

Date: May 1, 2023

                                             Tanya S. Chutkan
                                             TANYA S. CHUTKAN
                                             United States District Judge