Gilberti PE v. Holy See

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided May 27, 2025·No. 1:24-cv-09107·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JOSEPH D. GILBERTI PE, Plaintiff, -against- 24-CV-9107 (LTS) HOLY SEE, THE VATICAN CITY STATE, ET ORDER OF DISMISSAL AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who currently is held at the Sarasota County Jail in Sarasota, Florida, brings this action, pro se, alleging that Defendants violated his rights. By order dated February 12, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees.1 For the reasons set forth below, the Court dismisses the complaint. STANDARD OF REVIEW The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires that federal courts screen complaints brought by prisoners who seek relief against a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a

governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of the complaint, that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b); see Abbas v. Dixon, 480 F.3d 636, 639 (2d Cir. 2007). The Court must also dismiss a complaint if the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).

1 Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been granted permission to proceed IFP. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). While the law mandates dismissal on any of these grounds, the Court is obliged to construe pro se pleadings liberally, Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009), and interpret them to raise the “strongest [claims] that they suggest,” Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (emphasis in

original). But the “special solicitude” in pro se cases, id. at 475 (citation omitted), has its limits – to state a claim, pro se pleadings still must comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires a complaint to make a short and plain statement showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. A claim is frivolous when it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324-25 (1989), abrogated on other grounds by Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007); see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992) (holding that “finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible”); Livingston v. Adirondack Beverage Co., 141 F.3d 434, 437 (2d Cir. 1998) (“[A]n action is ‘frivolous’ when either: (1) the factual contentions

are clearly baseless . . . ; or (2) the claim is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). BACKGROUND Plaintiff, who describes himself as a “Professional Engineer in the State of Florida” (ECF 1, at 1), brings this action against approximately 213 defendants, including former United States Presidents; members of the Rothschild family; members of the Trump family; Majorie Stoneman Douglas School; governors of various states; state and federal judges, including Justices of the United States Supreme Court; towns and cities in Florida; the United States Congress; the Central Intelligence Agency; Seminole Tribe Hard Rock Casino; the Florida Department of Law Enforcement; various colleges and universities; members of the Rockefeller family; the Archdioceses of Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Baltimore, New York, and other cities; the Washington Post; the United Nations; and Canadian National Railway, among many others. The gravamen of Plaintiff’s 236-page complaint is that he has “found a hidden underground Natural resource in Medicine, Energy and Water Supply production and National

Defense” and that “Defendants are working in a Racketeering Enterprise with Leaders, agencies and Land Developers to destroy water supply and Americans with higher rates of Cancers, Viruses and Diseases as well as destroying the Environment, Fish & Wildlife, Tourism, Jobs and Macroeconomic growth in Florida, America and abroad.” (Id. at 10.)2 Examples of Plaintiff’s allegations include the following: Prior to July 26, 2013, Cecil Daughtrey Jr. and Patricia A. Daughtrey (collectively “Daughtrey”) were owners of the entire seven parcel property. However, on July 26, 2013, Daughtrey conveyed, via properly witnessed and executed Warranty Deed, a portion of the Property to PLAINTIFF. A true and correct copy of the Warranty Deed is attached as EXHIBIT “A”. Since then a State and National attack by Florida Leaders and CIA with Bush Family has taken place on Plaintiff and Americans to hide PRIMARY WATER to TAPS of Florida for 10yrs now with a barrage of attacks to subdue the Engineer of Record and Deed Holder while attaching Daughtrey land as they didn’t know exactly where the resource was on the forested ranch. We had to hide it on Civil engineering plans during these Times Terrorism attacks, fueled by all Florida Sheriff and FBI under Title 18 Treason……..to protect our fellow Americans from these US Terrorist Politicians and Lawyers in Florida, such as Greenberg Taurig and Henderson Franklin and all Sarasota Lawyers (its a gang) tied to Rothschild World Bank and a gang of Retarded Judges who lie, cheat and steal to kill children with Cancer Rates at the tap by PLAYING STUPID ON EVIDENTIARY HEARING and NOT ALLOWING ANY EVIDENCE while they attack with Desantis and Yale fools for 10yrs. (Id. at 6.) The “unique resource” that Plaintiff discovered was hidden 50yrs by NASA and EPA, to stall new energy production resources and new science to depopulate Humanity, increase costs, pollutions, and attack

2 The Court quotes from the complaint verbatim. All spelling, punctuation, and grammar are as in the original unless otherwise noted. THE ENGINEER from exposing the knowledge and resource to THE PEOPLE of the United States of America[] and Florida; preventing his ability to Due process in courtrooms, taking his 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Constitutional Amendments with multiple Judges in multiple jurisdictions working together to hide the US Resource for foreign corps like Israel Chemical LTD, Mosaic Phosphate and more; retroactive with the unique resource discovery. A full blown attack on the Engineer, his clients, his family, children, bank accounts, reputation and business has been taking place continuously from 2011 to the present time, with wake AR-15 emails created by the Tampa State Attorney office and ex-public defenders. (Id. at 15.) Plaintiff’s allegations against specific individuals include, George W.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Gilberti PE v. Holy See, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Gilberti PE v. Holy See (Gilberti PE v. Holy See) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Neitzke v. Williams
490 U.S. 319 (Supreme Court, 1989)
Denton v. Hernandez
504 U.S. 25 (Supreme Court, 1992)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Hill v. Curcione
657 F.3d 116 (Second Circuit, 2011)
Harris v. Mills
572 F.3d 66 (Second Circuit, 2009)
Abbas v. Dixon
480 F.3d 636 (Second Circuit, 2007)
Salahuddin v. Cuomo
861 F.2d 40 (Second Circuit, 1988)