Zimmerman v. Zuckerberg ( 2023 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ROBERT ZIMMERMAN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 23-01316 (UNA)
)
)
MARK ZUCKERBERG et al., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action, brought pro se, is before the Court on review of Plaintiff’s Complaint With
Jury Trial Demand, Dkt. 1, and application to proceed in forma pauperis, Dkt. 2. The Court will
grant the application and dismiss the complaint.1
Complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to “less stringent standards” than those applied
to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Still, 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 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). It “does not require
detailed factual allegations, but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-
harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (cleaned up). In addition,
Rule 8(d) states that “[e]ach allegation must be simple, concise, and direct.” Fed. R. Civ. P.
8(d)(1). “Taken together, [those provisions] underscore the emphasis placed on clarity and brevity
1
Although the complaint lists Uxor Press as a co-plaintiff, an artificial entity cannot proceed in federal
court without licensed counsel, see Rowland v. Cal. Men's Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201–07 (1993) (citing 28
U.S.C. § 1654), nor can it proceed in forma pauperis, see id. at 201 (“Four contextual features indicate that
‘person’ in § 1915(a) refers only to individuals . . . .”). Therefore, as indicated in the caption of this opinion,
the sole plaintiff here is Robert Zimmerman.
by the federal pleading rules.” Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 669 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (citation
omitted).
The Rule 8 standard ensures that defendants receive fair notice of the claim being asserted
so that they can prepare a responsive answer, mount an adequate defense, and determine whether
the doctrine of res judicata applies. See Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
The standard also assists the court in determining whether it has jurisdiction over the subject
matter.
Plaintiff has filed a 223-page complaint against Mark Zuckerberg and his company Meta
Platforms, Inc., “for Intentional Violations of Federal and State Laws.” Compl., Dkt. 1 (footer).
The sheer volume and prolixity of the complaint are reason enough to dismiss for failure to provide
adequate notice of a claim See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) and 8(d) (listing minimum pleading
requirements); Ciralsky, 355 F.3d at 669; see also Jiggetts v. District of Columbia, 319 F.R.D.
408, 413 (D.D.C. 2017) (a complaint that is “rambling, disjointed, incoherent, or full of irrelevant
and confusing material will patently fail [Rule 8(a)’s] standard,” as will one containing “an untidy
assortment of claims that are neither plainly nor concisely stated”) (cleaned up)), aff'd sub nom.
Cooper v. District of Columbia, No. 17-7021, 2017 WL 5664737 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 1, 2017). A
separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
_____________________
DABNEY L. FRIEDRICH
Date: May 26, 2023 United States District Judge
2