EMRIT
v.
HORUS MUSIC VIDEO DISTRIBUTION

M.D. Fla. | 2020-04-23
No. 8:19-cv-2531
2020 WL 731171 District Court, M.D. Florida (2020) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 2019 WL 6251192 · 2015 WL 518774
Cited by 10 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was conclusory and patently frivolous, failing to connect factual allegations to legal claims.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sued music distribution companies and banks alleging copyright infringement and removal of music videos. He had previously paid for distribu…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
28 U.S.C. § 1915(E) Review 28 U.S.C. § 1915(E) Conclusory Allegations Vexatious Litigation

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 28 U.S.C. § 1915(E) Review cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

This matter is before the Court on sua sponte review of pro se Plaintiff Ronald Satish Emrit’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

After reviewing the complaint, court file, and record, the Court finds as follows: Since at least 2013, Emrit has been a serial filer of frivolous actions in federal courts throughout the United States. See, e.g., Emrit v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, 2020 WL 731171 *1 n.1 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2020) (discussing Emrit’s litigation history); Emrit v. Universal Music Group, 3:19-CV-05984-BHS, 2019 WL 6251365, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Nov 4, 2019), report and recommendation adopted, No. C19-5984 BHS, 2019 WL 6251192 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 22, 2019) (same); Emrit v. Nat’l Acad. of Recording Arts and Scis, No. A-14-CA-392-SS, 2015 WL 518774, at *4 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 5, 2015) (same).1 In fact, “over two hundred civil cases and appeals in the federal court system have been filed under [Emrit’s] name, and he has been barred from filing suits without leave of court in [several] federal district courts.”

Emrit v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, No. 6:20-cv-191-Orl-41LRH, 2020 WL 1451623, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 25, 2020) (internal quotation omitted). On April 20, 2020, this Court entered an order declaring him a vexatious litigant. Emrit v. DeVos, No. 8:20-cv-773-T-60TGW (M.D. Fla. Apr. 20, 2020). Now, Emrit attempts to bring suit in this Court against Defendants Horus Music Video Distribution, Tidal, PayPal, and Chase Bank.2 However, he has also

filed identical actions in at least six other district courts throughout the United States.3 Construing his pleadings liberally, Emrit alleges he communicated to an employee of Defendant Horus Music Video Distribution that one of its recording artists “contributed copyright infringement on … [Emrit’s] song ‘Dilemma[.]’” [Emrit] alleges Defendant Horus Music Video Distribution then removed four of [his] music videos from Defendant TIDAL’s website. [Emrit] alleges he had previously paid Defendant Horus Music Video Distribution “to have four music videos distributed to Jay-Z’s website TIDAL. Based on these alleged facts, [Emrit] filed suit against Defendants for (1) breach of contract, (2) tortious interference with contract, and (3) tortious interference with business relations.

Emrit v. Horus Music Video Distribution, No. 3:20-cv-60, 2020 WL 553839, at *1 (S.D. Cal.).

Reviewing identical pleadings, the Southern District of California concluded that “[a]side from general facts and conclusory allegations ... the basis for [Emrit’s] claim is unclear” and dismissed the case under § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Jd. Upon its own independent review, this Court comes to the same conclusion. Emrit’s complaint is “conclusory and patently frivolous” where he fails to draw any connection between his legal claims and the factual allegations of his complaint. See Emrit v. DeVos, No. 1:20-CV-35 JAR, 2020 WL 833595, at *2 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 20, 2020); Universal Music Group, 2019 WL 6251365, at *2 (explaining that Emrit’s complaint was frivolous, malicious, and “part of [Emrit’s] ongoing and persistent pattern of abusing the IFP privilege by filing vexatious, harassing, and duplicative lawsuits”).

Consequently, Emrit’s complaint is due to be dismissed. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: 1. The complaint (Doc. 2)is DISMISSED without leave to amend.

2. The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions or deadlines and thereafter CLOSE THIS CASE. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 23rd day of April, 2020.

+ Let: (GQ

TOM BARBER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Footnotes
1 The Texas district court documented cases filed by Emrit since March 2013, along with the results of those actions – each of the forty-seven cases referenced in the chart was dismissed. Since then, Emrit has only continued to clog the federal district courts and appellate courts with meritless and frivolous litigation. A PACER search as of the date of this Order reflects that, including the instant case, Emrit has three cases pending in the Middle District of Florida, and sixteen cases pending in thirteen other jurisdictions across the United States. 2 Chase Bank was voluntarily dismissed from this action. See (Docs. 7, 14). 3 See Emrit v. Horus Media Ltd., 5:20-cv-2 (D. Alaska); Emrit v. Horus Music Video Distribution, 3:20-cv-60 (S.D. Cal.); Emrit v. Horus Music Video Distribution, 1:20-cv-7 (D. Haw.); Emrit v. Horus Music Video Distribution, 6:20-cv-23 (D. Or.); Emrit v. Horus Music Video Distribution, 4:19-cv-333 (S.D. Iowa); Emrit v. Horus Music Video Distribution, 4:19-cv-40144 (D. Mass.).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Emrit v. Horus Music Video Distrib., 2020 WL 731171 (M.D. Fla. 2020)
    …c Group, 3:19-CV-05984-BHS, 2019 WL 6251365, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Nov 4, 2019), report and recommendation adopted, No. C19-5984 BHS, 2019 WL 6251192 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 22, 2019) (same); Emrit v. Nat’l Acad. of Recording Arts and Scis, No. A-14-CA-392-SS, 2015 WL 518774, at *4 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 5, 2015) (same).1 In fact, “over two hundred civil cases and appeals in the federal court system have been filed under [Emrit’s] name, and he has been barred from filing suits without leave of court in [several] federal distr…
    1 / 3
  • Emrit v. Cobb Gonzalez Law Finn of Jacksonville, 2019 WL 935028 (M.D. Fla. 2025)
    …Servs. (CMS), No. 2:14-CV-1761-GMN-PAL, 2016 WL 164992, at *2 (D. Nev. Jan. 14, 2016); Emrit v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 2:14-cv-1760-GMN, 2015 WL 4597834, at *1 (D. Nev. July 29, 2015); Emrit v. Nat'l Acad. of Recording Arts and Scis, No. A-14-CA-392-SS, 2015 WL 518774, at *4 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 5, 2015); Emrit v. AOL Time Warner, No. 14-cv-314 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y. May 16, 2014)). In 2020, this Court concluded that Plaintiff was abusing the court system and entered a filing-injunction against him, prohibiting him from "fi…
  • Emrit v. Universal Music Grp., 2019 WL 6251365 (M.D. Fla. 2020)
    …ectronic case database for cases filed under the name Ronald Satish Emrit shows Plaintiff has filed approximately 375 cases or appeals in the federal court system.”)(citations omitted), report and recommendation adopted, No. C19-5984 BHS, 2019 WL 6251192 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 22, 2019); Emrit v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, No. 20-CV- 265-CAB-KSC, 2020 WL 731171, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2020)(“A PACER search reveals that Plaintiff has filed over 250 federal lawsuits since 2013, including 31 s…
    1 / 2

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw