1:25-cv-02956•MALLGREN v. UNITED STATES et al
Texte intégral
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
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.