The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
JOSEPH D. GILBERTI, JR. , P.E., an
individual and licensed professional
engineer
Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 2:19-cv-282-FtM-38MRM
RON DESANTIS, THE MOSAIC
COMPANY, MOSAIC FERTILIZER,
LLC, ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
SARASOTA COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
DESOTO COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY STATE
ATTORNEYS OFFICE, SARASOTA
MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, PEACE
RIVER MANASOTA WATER
SUPPLY AUTHORITY,
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, 72
PARTNERS, LLC and LUIS E.
RIVERA,
Defendants.
/
OPINION AND ORDER1
Plaintiff Joseph Gilberti accuses Defendants of “manipulating and laundering US
Tax dollars…to steal unique lands and hide Natural and Endless Drinking water to fill
cancer centers with bad manmade treated water from Polluted ground water and Rivers,
1 Disclaimer: Documents hyperlinked to CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the
Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products
they provide, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is also not responsible for a hyperlink’s
availability and functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order.
to sell medicine, cancer centers and healthcare machines while killing millions of people
over decades.” (Doc. 1 at 2). In his 112-page Complaint, Gilberti alleges a bizarre and
incomprehensible conspiracy to, among other things, cause cancer, kill children, increase
opioid use, and damage the economy by “hiding secret underground rivers of Unique
Alkaline Spring Water.” And he asks for relief that this Court cannot grant, like reporting
Defendants to President Trump, obtaining $10 billion from the Federal Reserve, enlisting
the military to help install water supply infrastructure, and returning foreclosed homes to
previous owners.
Several defendants moved to dismiss, but the Court stayed this case pending the
results of Gilberti’s appeal of the dismissal of a nearly identical case he filed in the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia. The D.C. District Court dismissed that
case because federal courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction over “patently
insubstantial” claims. Gilberti v. Fed. Reserve Sys., No. 1:19-CV-738, 2019 WL 1901293,
at *2 (D.D.C. Apr. 29, 2019). The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed, finding
that Gilberti “alleged no plausible facts that would entitle him to relief.” Gilberti v. Fed.
Reserve Sys., No. 19-5264, 2020 WL 1487738 (11th Cir. Mar. 3, 2020).
Gilberti filed another substantially similar case in this District: Gilberti v. Adrurra
Grp. Inc., No. 8:19-CV-2012-VMC-AAS. It too was dismissed for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, finding no error with the district court’s
conclusion that Gilberti’s claims were patently without merit. Gilberti v. Adrurra Grp., Inc.,
No. 19-15176, 2020 WL 1951663, at *2 (11th Cir. Apr. 23, 2020).
The Court agrees with the other district and circuit courts that have evaluated
Gilberti’s claims—they are “essentially fictitious” and “obviously without merit.” Id. at *1
(quoting Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 537 (1974)). As such, this Court lacks subject
matter jurisdiction, and dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) is
warranted.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
(1) Joseph D. Gilberti, Jr.'s complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED.
(2) The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate all pending motions and deadlines, enter
judgment, and close the case.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 15th day of May, 2020.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record