u.s. district court eastern district of new york (brooklyn ...fche/mirrors/ · to proceed as it is...
TRANSCRIPT
CLOSED,NPROSE
U.S. District CourtEastern District of New York (Brooklyn)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:14-mc-00876-NGG
Purisima v. Zheng et alAssigned to: Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis
Date Filed: 07/21/2014Date Terminated: 07/30/2014
Plaintiff
Anton Purisima represented by Anton Purisima390 9th AvenueNew York, NY 10001PRO SE
V.
Defendant
Eddie Zheng("Manager")
Defendant
Nafang Mo("President")
Defendant
People Republic of China (PRC) ("China")
Defendant
Wang Dang"Jack Wang" ("Ugly Gorilla")
Defendant
Sun Kai Liang"Sun Kai Liang" ("Jack Sun")
Defendant
Huang Zhen YuHuang Zhen Yu "HZY-THX"
Defendant
Wen Xin YuWen Xin Yu "Win XY Happy" "Win XY" ("Lao Wen")
Defendant
Gu ChunhuiGu Chun Hui, "Kandy Goo"
Defendant
Edward J. SnowdenNSA Contractor, ("The Leaker"), Edward Snowden
Defendant
Does 1-1.3 Billion
Date Filed # Docket Text
07/21/2014 1 MOTION for Leave to File a New Case by Anton Purisima. (Davis, Kimberly) (Entered: 07/24/2014)
07/21/2014 2 COMPLAINT against Gu Chunhui, Wang Dang, Does 1-1.3 Billion, Sun Kai Liang, Nafang Mo, People Republic of China(PRC) ("China"), Edward J. Snowden, Huang Zhen Yu, Wen Xin Yu, Eddie Zheng, filed by Anton Purisima. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Davis, Kimberly) (Entered: 07/24/2014)
07/21/2014 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Anton Purisima. (Davis, Kimberly) (Entered: 07/24/2014)
07/24/2014 4 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if allparties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil actionincluding a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of theconsent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also beaccessed at the following link:http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold yourconsent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties havesigned the consent. (Davis, Kimberly) (Entered: 07/24/2014)
07/30/2014 5 ORDER: Plaintiff's 1 request for leave to file a new action and accompanying 3 motion to proceed in forma pauperis areDENIED. The court's prior Order barring Plaintiff from filing future in forma pauperis complaints without first seeking thecourt's leave remains in effect. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 7/28/2014. (c/m to pro se) (Lee, Tiffeny)(Entered: 07/30/2014)
PACER Service CenterTransaction Receipt
08/01/2014 18:16:27
PACER Login: ud0006 Client Code:
Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 1:14-mc-00876-NGG
Billable Pages: 2 Cost: 0.20
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------)(
ANTON PURISIMA,
Plaintiff,
-against-
EDDIE ZHENG, NAFANG MO, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (PRC), WANG DONG, SUN KAILIANG, WEN )(IN YU, HUANG ZHEN YU, HUANG ZHEN YU, GU CHUNHUI, EDWARD J. SNOWDEN, DOES 1-1.3 BILLION,
Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------)( NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS, United States District Judge.
ORDER
14-MC-876 (NGG)
On January 31, 2012, in response to the filing of multiple frivolous and duplicative
actions by Plaintiff Anton Purisima, this court barred Plaintiff from filing any new in forma
pauperis complaints in this court without first seeking the court's leave. See Purisima v. )(ilai,
No. 11-CV-5523 (NGG), 2012 WL 293772 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2012), reconsideration denied,
2012 WL 669045 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 29, 2012). On July 21, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Proposed
Complaint (Dkt. 2), accompanied by a request for leave to file a new action (Dkt. 1) and an
application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 3).
Plaintiff's request for leave fails to provide the court with any valid reason to allow the
proposed action to go forward. Plaintiff argues that the Proposed Complaint should be allowed
to proceed as it is "related" to his pending case, Purisima v. Tiffany Entertainment, et al., No. 09-
CV-3502 (NGG). To the extent that his Proposed Complaint reiterates substantially the same
allegations raised in his "underlying" action, the claims plainly are duplicative. Moreover, to the
Case 1:14-mc-00876-NGG Document 5 Filed 07/30/14 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 161
extent that Plaintiff seeks to raise new claims, his allegations are rambling and baseless. For
instance, Plaintiff alleges that the People's Republic of China executed "Three (3) plus One (1)
Filipinos" as retaliation against Plaintiff. (Proposed Compl. at 32.) He further asserts that China
harvested the organs of the aforementioned individuals and "transferred these harvested organs
to waiting rich Chinese." (Id. at 33.) In addition, Plaintiffs Proposed Complaint includes a
letter directed to Edward Snowden, in which Plaintiff seeks damages for any and all actions that
Mr. Snowden is alleged to have taken against the United States and challenges Mr. Snowden to a
game of poker at a casino of Mr. Snowden's choosing. (Id. at 21-30.) Finally, Plaintiff seeks to
recover ten duodecillion dollars in damages (llL. at 56), which is a one followed by thirty-seven
zeroes and equates to roughly 5.8 x 1023 times the gross domestic product of the United States.
Plaintiffs allegations are frivolous and duplicative. Plaintiff demonstrates that neither
his lack of success in filing these submissions nor the warnings of this court will deter him from
filing frivolous and repetitive proceedings. See Purisima v. Xilai, et al., No. 11-CV-5523
(NGG), 2011WL6329831, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2011) (dismissing Plaintiffs claims as
frivolous and duplicative of his previous actions); Purisima v. Xilai, et al., No. 12-MC-748
(NGG) (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 26, 2013) (denying Plaintiff leave to file duplicative suit); Purisima v.
Zemin, et al., No. 12-MC-755 (NGG) (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 26, 2013) (same).
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, Plaintiffs request for leave to file a new action and accompanying motion
to proceed in forma pauperis are DENIED. The court's prior Order barring Plaintiff from filing
future in forma pauperis complaints without first seeking the court's leave remains in effect. The
Clerk of Court is directed to return without filing and without judicial order any future in forma
pauperis complaint submitted by Plaintiff that does not comply with the Court's filing injunction.
2
Case 1:14-mc-00876-NGG Document 5 Filed 07/30/14 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 162
The court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (a)(3) that any appeal from this order
would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose
of an appeal. CoP.Peflge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this action
SO ORDERED.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York July2C, 2014
\
3
foicttoLAS o. GARAUFI~ United States District Judge
s/Nicholas G. Garaufis
Case 1:14-mc-00876-NGG Document 5 Filed 07/30/14 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 163