UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
June 6, 2011
MURAKUSH CALIPHATE OF AMEXEM INC., PLAINTIFF,
JEROME B. SIMANDLE, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mary L. Cooper United States District Judge
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
PLAINTIFF, Murakush Caliphate of Amexem Inc., submitted for filing a pro se civil complaint, together with an application to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee and a motion for appointment of pro bono counsel. See dkt. entries nos. 1, 2, 3.
PLAINTIFF also initiated another matter in the District of New Jersey. See Murakush Caliphate of Amexem Inc., d/b/a Murakush Imperial Temple of Amexem v. State of New Jersey, Civ. Action No. 11-1317 (RBK) (D.N.J.) ("Murakush-Amexem").
ON May 13, 2011, the complaint in Murakush-Amexem was dismissed. See Murakush Caliphate of Amexem Inc. v. New Jersey, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51887 (D.N.J. May 13, 2011). The opinion accompanying the dismissal order explained to Plaintiff why a corporation cannot proceed in a civil action pro se or qualify for in forma pauperis status, or obtain pro bono counsel, or raise jus tertii claims. See id. In addition, that opinion detailed that the very same explanations had been provided to Plaintiff at least nine times by the judges in this District, the Southern District of Florida, the Eastern District of Virginia, and the District of Delaware, which made the explanations provided in Murakush-Amexem at least the tenth round of the same. See id. Thus, Plaintiff is familiar with the legal standards.
THE COURT will dismiss the Complaint here. The Court will issue an appropriate order and judgment.
Mary L. Cooper
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.