UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAFAYETTE DIVISION RONALD SATISH EMRIT CASE NO. 6:25-CV-00462 VERSUS JUDGE ROBERT R. SUMMERHAYS FEDERAL RESERVE BANK, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID J. AYO

ORDER Ronald Emrit has filed numerous frivolous lawsuits in federal courts across the country for over a decade.' Six days after he filed this lawsuit, the Chief Judge of the Western District of Louisiana entered an order dismissing a separate suit brought by Emrit. That order reads as follows: Ronald Emrit keeps filing frivolous lawsuits. See Emrit v. Barkley, 23-1275,

(3d Cir. May 8, 2023) (“Emrit has filed over 500 lawsuits throughout the country.”). Here, Mr. Emrit seeks $500,000,000,000—and delivery of his Ukrainian bride—from various intergovernmental associations. See ECF No. 1 at 1, 5. He alleges a conspiracy involving the Haunted Mansion at Disneyworld, a NASA astrobiologist, and actress Helen Mirren. Jd. at 6. In another case, Mr. Emrit seeks to patent a galactic black hole. See 25-cv-453 (W.D. La. April 7, 2025). And in another, Mr. Emrit sues P. Diddy for the “crimes of pimping and pandering.” See Emrit v. Combs, 1:24-CV-00369,

(W.D. La. Jan. 15, 2025). Unfortunately for Mr. Emrit, the Court needn’t entertain his delusional claims— and we’ve already warned him of as much. See id.; see also Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation v. Louisiana,

, 1006-07 (5th Cir. 2019). Accordingly, Mr. Emrit’s claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Any further filing by Mr. Emrit in the Western District of Louisiana may only be made with the written permission of the Chief Judge; in this case, the undersigned.” Emrit’s suit before this Court is likewise wholly without merit.

' See e.g. Emrit v. Cheap-O-Air, CV PWG-13-803,

(D. Md. Apr. 1, 2013), aff’d,

(4th Cir. 2013); Emrit v. Wells Fargo Bank, Inc., 18CV318-MMA (JLB),

(S.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2018); Emrit v. Sec’y, United States Dep t of Educ.,

, 477 (11th Cir. 2020); Emrit v. Grammy Awards on CBS, 24-CV-00122-LTB,

(D. Colo. Jan. 30, 2024), aff'd, 24-1056,

(10th Cir. Aug. 16, 2024); Emrit v. Cobb Gonzalez Law Firm of Jacksonville, Florida, et al., 8:25-CV-999-WFJ-NHA,

(M.D. Fla. May 14, 2025). 2 See Ronald Satish Emrit v. International Court of Justice, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-00447 (W.D. La.), ECF No. 5.

Here, Emrit seeks $500 billion from the Federal Reserve Bank, the Federal Open Market Committee, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and the National Mint for “tortious interference with business relations and/or contracts.”? He asks that “Chief Judge Shelly Dick” (who is the Chief Judge of the Middle District of Louisiana, not the Western) “issue a declaratory judgment related to President Trump’s tariffs against Canada, Mexico, and China which are negatively impacting the American economy,” or alternatively, “an injunction against the Federal Reserve Bank and/or U.S. Department of Commerce . . . from implementing Donald Trump’s tariffs,” and/or “requiring that the defendants adjust the interest rates accordingly at which they purchase Treasury Bills (T-Bills) or bonds.”* From there, he sets forth purported “facts” that are not only wholly unrelated to his claim before this Court, but are “so insubstantial, implausible, . . . or otherwise completely devoid of merit as not to involve a federal controversy.”° Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this suit be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. THUS DONE in Chambers on this ish day of May, 2025.

Si IF Ol ZP ROBERT R. SUM UNITED STATES DISTR WDGE

3 ECF No. 1 at 1. “ Td. at 2, 10. ° Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation v. Louisiana,

, 1006 (Sth Cir. 2019) (quoting Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y. v. Oneida Cty.,

(1974)).