Opinion
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00150-MP-AK.
January 23, 2008
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Doc. 6, Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which recommends that Plaintiff Riches' complaint, Doc. 1, be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The Magistrate Judge filed the Report and Recommendation on Wednesday, October 17, 2007. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo review of those portions to which an objection has been made. In this instance, however, no objections have been filed.
In his complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the OnStar Corporation violated his civil rights through racketeering, fraud, invasion, wiretapping, obstruction of justice, war crimes, treason, and espionage. OnStar Corporation is a wholly-owned subsidiary of General Motors, which provides subscription-based communications, monitoring, and tracking services throughout the United States and Canada. Plaintiff states that these services are part of a vast conspiracy with the Uniform Commercial Code to track our movements for a "new world order." As the Magistrate points out, Plaintiff fails to allege how the Florida Gators Basketball Team is involved in the conspiracy to establish a "new world order." In counts two through five, Plaintiff claims that OnStar stole his original technology and used it for their financial gain, and that OnStar's false advertising is sending subliminal messages through radio and television frequencies.
Plaintiff has previously attempted to bring suit against the Uniform Commercial Code, which was dismissed without prejudice.See Riches v. Uniform Commercial Code, 3:2006-cv-01428 (N.D. CA. 2006). The Uniform Commercial Code is a uniform act without independent legislative force, designed to harmonize state laws regarding sales and other commercial transactions. It is unclear how one could ever conspire with a uniform code.
Under the precedent of the Eleventh Circuit, this Court presumes the truth of allegations in a complaint, and liberally construes complaint terms in favor of the Plaintiff. See Municipal Utils. Bd. v. Alabama Power Co., 934 F.2d 1493, 1500 (11th Cir. 1991). Plaintiff Riches© has filed similar fantastical law suits around the country, and truly tests the boundaries of the presumption of truth. In one complaint, Plaintiff claims that he is a "professional entertainer who specializes in music, identity theft, computer hacking, yoga, equestrian mule riding, coal mining, time travel, and skeet shooting." Riches v. Imus, 6:2007-cv-00843 (D.N.M. Sept. 28, 2007). Plaintiff Riches© has also alleged that Apple C.E.O. Steve Jobs is secretly arranging to release O.J. Simpson from prison to "radio wave warp" the Plaintiff because of his possession of "old football cards of O.J. Simpson"; that Martha Stewart is conspiring to have Floyd Landis pedal his missile bike into the South Fork dam while E.T. uses his magical powers; that the late Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto is attempting to deport the Plaintiff to Pakistan for torture because of their belief that the Plaintiff is a Taliban Tribal Leader; that Michael Vick threw snowballs at the Plaintiff and hired robots to guard him; that United States federal judges stole the Plaintiff's copyrighted name and sold it to Google.com; and that David Beckham is an illegal immigrant who uses satellite-guided soccer balls that are remote-controlled by British agent James Bond and Pakistani intelligence.
Plaintiff is reminded that as a convicted felon, he is prohibited from possessing firearms, and the conditions of any supervised release may prohibit him from possessing dangerous weapons.
Riches v. Simpson, 6:2007-cv-1504-GAP-KRS (M.D.Fla. Sept., 24 2007).
Riches v. Stewart, 2:07-cv-01338-FXC (W.D. Pa. Oct. 3, 2007).
Riches v. Bhutto, 2:07-cv-02394-MCE-JFM (E.D.Cal. Nov. 7, 2007).
Riches v. Vick, 3:07-cv-00434-HER (E.D.Va. Aug. 31, 2007).
Riches v. Federal Judicial System, 2:07-cv-00124-GZS (D.Me. Sept. 10, 2007).
Riches v. Beckham, 1:07-cv-01747-WWC-PT (M.D.Pa. Sept. 27, 2007).
After reviewing the instant complaint, the Magistrate recommends that it be dismissed summarily for failure to state a claim. The Eleventh Circuit has made clear that the dismissal standard is extraordinary, and one not to be taken lightly. See Brooks v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., 116 F.3d 1364, 1368 (11th Cir. 1997). Nevertheless, the Court agrees with the Magistrate that Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim, and should be dismissed. Therefore, having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the lack of objections thereto, I have determined that it should be adopted. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
DONE AND ORDERED.
1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and incorporated herein.
2. Plaintiff's complaint, Doc. 1, is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.