
    Jerome L. GRIMES, Plaintiff, v. SIZZLENGER, et al., Defendants.
    Civil Action No. 17-1561 (UNA)
    United States District Court, District of Columbia.
    Signed 8/25/2017
    Filed 8/29/2017
    Jerome L. Grimes, Sykesville, MD, pro se.
   MEMORANDUM OPINION

Amy Berman Jackson, United States District Judge

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiffs- application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant, the application, and dismiss the complaint.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that a complaint contain “ ‘a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,’ in order to ‘give the defendant fair notice of what the ... claim is and the grounds upon which it rests[.]’ ” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). Further, a complaint must “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ ” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955). A claim is facially plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556, 127 S.Ct. 1955). Although a pro se complaint is “held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers,” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 167 L.Ed.2d 1081 (2007) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), it too, “must plead ‘factual matter’ that permits the court to infer ‘more than the mere possibility of misconduct,’ ” Atherton v. District of Columbia Office of the Mayor, 567 F.3d 672, 681-82 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678-79, 129 S.Ct. 1937).

It appears that plaintiff brings a civil rights action against his former defense counsel. Although plaintiff makes concluso-ry statements as to defendants’ alleged violations of rights protected under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, there are no factual allegations in the complaint describing the circumstances under which plaintiffs claims arose. As drafted, the complaint fails to state a plausible claim, and the Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.  