177 F. Supp. 3d 509
D.D.C.2016Background
- Plaintiff Darren Vasaturo, a U.S. citizen living in Kyoto, filed a 228‑page pro se Amended Complaint naming 33 defendants, alleging a conspiracy (including CIA involvement) to violate his rights.
- Defendant Yahiya Abdelsamad moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.
- Vasaturo’s allegations against Abdelsamad are sparse and largely conclusory (e.g., membership in Freemasonry, alleged CIA affiliation, and vague links to other defendants).
- The Amended Complaint and Opposition contain long, rambling factual narratives but fail to identify specific overt acts by Abdelsamad in furtherance of any conspiracy.
- The Court evaluated the filings under the Rule 12(b)(6) plausibility standard, giving pro se pleadings liberal consideration but requiring factual content permitting a reasonable inference of liability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Amended Complaint states a plausible conspiracy claim under Rule 12(b)(6) | Vasaturo contends Abdelsamad participated in a conspiracy (CIA/MI6 links) to displace him from Kyoto | Abdelsamad argues the Complaint lacks factual allegations showing his participation or overt acts in a conspiracy | Court: Dismissed for failure to plead specific facts showing an agreement or overt acts; conspiracy claim not plausible |
| Whether conclusory allegations suffice to survive dismissal | Vasaturo relies on general assertions and alleged associations among expatriates | Abdelsamad contends legal conclusions and speculation are insufficient | Court: Legal conclusions and unsupported inferences are not accepted; plaintiff must plead factual content to allow a reasonable inference of liability |
| Whether the court should construe pro se filings liberally and consider responsive filings | Vasaturo relied on his Amended Complaint and Opposition for factual assertions | Abdelsamad recognized pro se status but maintained pleading standards apply | Court: Construed pro se filings liberally and considered opposition, but liberal construction does not excuse failure to plead plausible facts |
| Whether dismissal should be with or without prejudice | Vasaturo sought to advance broad conspiratorial claims | Abdelsamad sought dismissal of claims against him | Court: Granted dismissal without prejudice, permitting amendment if plaintiff can articulate a legitimate claim against Abdelsamad |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (complaint must plead factual matter to state a plausible claim)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (courts need not accept legal conclusions disguised as facts)
- Dura Pharm., Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336 (2005) (notice‑pleading not meant to impose undue burdens, but factual plausibility required)
- Sparrow v. United Air Lines, Inc., 216 F.3d 1111 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (pleading allegations treated as true and plaintiff given all inferences)
- Trudeau v. Fed. Trade Comm’n, 456 F.3d 178 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (court need not accept unsupported inferences)
- Brown v. Whole Foods Market, 789 F.3d 146 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (pro se complaints considered in light of all filings)
- Bush v. Butler, 521 F. Supp. 2d 63 (D.D.C. 2007) (conspiracy claims dismissed where only conclusory allegations of agreement were alleged)
- Acosta Orellana v. CropLife Int’l, 711 F. Supp. 2d 81 (D.D.C. 2010) (dismissal where plaintiff failed to allege how specific defendants participated in conspiracy)