MALLGREN v. UNITED STATES et al

1:25-cv-02956DcdDec 8, 2025

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANTHONY BRIAN MALLGREN, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-02956 (UNA)
)
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed a Complaint (“Compl.”), ECF No. 1, and an
Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), ECF No. 2. 	The Court grants
Plaintiff’s IFP Application, and for the reasons discussed below, it dismisses this matter without
prejudice.
Plaintiff, a resident of the District of Columbia, sues the United States and “All Criminals.”
See Compl. at 1. The Complaint is vague and sparse. Plaintiff alleges only that “[i]t is believed
that all respondent constitutionalized persons in this case are acting anticompetitively and
destructively.” Id. For relief, Plaintiff demands “[t]ime in making a decision whom is the greater
party.” Id.
Pro se litigants must comply with the Federal and Local Rules of Civil Procedure. 	See
Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239–40 (D.D.C. 1987). Federal Rule 8(a) requires a complaint
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 respondents receive fair notice of the claim
Case 1:25-cv-02956-UNA Document 3 Filed 12/08/25 Page 1 of 2
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).
Here, Plaintiff’s ambiguous allegations fall well short of providing notice of any claim or
establishing this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the Court dismisses the Complaint, and this matter, without prejudice. 	An
Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
TREVOR N. McFADDEN
Date: December 8, 2025 	United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-02956-UNA Document 3 Filed 12/08/25 Page 2 of 2

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.