IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 23-5193 : GO FOOT CARE LLC :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 23-5194 : VENANTE TOUSSAINT :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 23-5196 : VENANTE TOUSSAINT :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 23-5197 : MATTHEW BARKOFF :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 23-5198 : ALLISON VITELLAET :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-159 : VENANTE TOUSSAINT : FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-161 : VENANTE TOUSSAINT :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-223 : GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-225 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-226 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-228 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-229 : : : In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-230 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-233 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-235 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-236 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-237 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-238 : : : In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-239 : :

: In re Fritz Gerald Toussaint : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-241 : :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-242 : INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-247 : OVS :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-251 : BROOKYLYN PUBLIC LIBRARY :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-252 : TANYA FAYE :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-254 : MERLIN CHARLES : FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-255 : ALLIA ARRAZIA :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-281 : THOMAS DINAPOLI :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-337 : IHRC :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-411 : HILLARY CLINTON :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-414 : BOB BARRET :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-417 : ITZEL : FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-419 : DEPARTMENT OF : HOMELAND SECURITY :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-420 : RADAMES VELASQUEZ :

FRITZ GERALD TOUSSAINT : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-421 : JABLONSKI :

McHUGH, J. February 7, 2024

MEMORANDUM

These are actions brought by the same pro se litigant, Fritz Gerald Toussaint, all filed in a period of less than two months. Mr. Toussaint has not paid the necessary filing fees in any of these actions, nor has he moved to proceed in forma pauperis. Notices sent by the Clerk of Court to the various addresses he has supplied have been returned without delivery, and based on the Court’s investigation to date, it appears that all Mr. Toussaint’s purported addresses are invalid. The Court has expended substantial time trying to comprehend the filings, with minimal success. Forty-three cases have been filed. Eight have been transferred because, however opaque the filing may be, there is no discernible link to this district. But those cases all suffer from the same deficits discussed below, and face prompt dismissal. Another case has been dismissed as duplicative. Many of the filings consist of a single page, without an identifiable defendant. Where a defendant is named, in most instances there is no further identifying information. In one case, Myparkingtickets.com LLC v. City of New York (23-5195), Mr. Toussaint sued in the name of a business with which he has no apparent affiliation. In another single page filing, he sued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, accusing her of mass deportations and demanding “discovery.” The common denominator in all these actions is a failure to comply with Rule 8 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” and “a demand for the relief sought.” “[A] pleading that is so ‘vague or ambiguous’ that a defendant cannot reasonably be expected to respond to it will not satisfy Rule 8.” Garrett v. Wexford Health,

(3d Cir. 2019); see also Fabian v. St. Mary’s Med. Ctr., No. 16-4741,

, at *3 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 11, 2017) (“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 requires that pleadings provide enough information to put a defendant on sufficient notice to prepare their defense and also ensure that the Court is sufficiently informed to determine the issue.”) (quotations omitted). Twelve of the case-initiating documents also violate Rule 10(a)’s requirement that a pleading contain a caption with the Court’s name and the names of the parties – styled by the Clerk of Court as “In Re: Fritz Gerald Toussaint” for this reason –

and all of them violate Rule 10(b)’s requirement that claims be listed in numbered paragraphs. Some of the filings are filled with sideways writing and arrows connecting disjointed sentences. In sum, the filings in each of these cases are accurately described as “so confused, ambiguous, vague, or otherwise unintelligible that its true substance, if any, is well disguised.” Garrett,

. All the cases have been reviewed. Given these inherent deficiencies, and Mr. Toussaint’s elusiveness, continuing this process of individually crafted orders for the remaining 34 cases is not a wise use of judicial resources. They will be dismissed, without prejudice. Should Mr. Toussaint seek to revive these matters, notwithstanding his pro se status, he must do so in reasonable compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and must further comply with the terms of the accompanying Order. /s/ Gerald Austin McHugh United States District Judge