LICHTERMAN et al v. MTV NETWORKS et al

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM ORDER: ORDER that the Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice. MOTION to Dismiss is granted 7 . Plaintiff Lichterman will have 45 days to file an amended complaint. ORDER that Plaintiffs Sunset Records, Sunset Music and Sunset Corporation of America, Inc. shall have 21 days to retain counsel. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 3/13/2015. (tf, n.m.) Modified on 3/13/2015 (tf, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CAMDEN VICINAGE

DON LICHTERMAN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Civil No. 14-7841 (RMB/AMD)

MTV NETWORKS, et al.,
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Defendants.

This matter comes before the Court upon Defendants’ MTV
Networks and Viacom, Inc. (the “Moving Defendants”) Motion to
Dismiss the Complaint [Docket No. 7].
the Motion is granted.

For the reasons herein,

Plaintiff Don Lichterman will be granted

30 days to amend the Complaint consistent with this Memorandum
Order.
Plaintiffs Don Lichterman, Sunset Records, Sunset Music,
and Sunset Corporation of America, Inc. (collectively,
“Plaintiffs”), proceeding pro se, commenced this action on
November 3, 2014, by the filing of a Complaint and Jury Demand
(the “Complaint”) in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law
Division, Camden County.

The Complaint asserts claims against

defendants MTV Networks, Adam Him, Viacom Inc., Dickhouse
Productions, Winston Giles, and Music Licensing Direcotory/Giles
Management.

1

The Moving Defendants removed the matter to the United
States District Court for the District of New Jersey on or about
December 17, 2014. [Docket No. 1] because the Complaint appeared
to allege copyright infringement claims under the Copyright Act,
17 U.S.C. § 101.

See Complt. 2, ¶ 3.

Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges in a verbose and rambling fashion
that undifferentiated defendants infringed an unidentified
copyright by playing an unidentified song on an unidentified
episode of the television show “Ridiculousness.”

Plaintiffs

appear to further allege that they were harassed, physically
threatened, libeled and defrauded by an unidentified defendant
in attempting to collect money for this use.
The Complaint consists of four parts spanning approximately
forty pages including exhibits.

The first part appears to be a

form complaint which sets forth several sections on the nature
of the case, the parties, and jurisdiction and venue in numbered
paragraphs using an unconventional numbering scheme.
pp. 3-6).

(Compl.,

The first part asserts that “[t]his case is quadruple

folded” and this is a “[c]omplaint for copyright infringement
under the Copyright Act, harassment claimns with physical
threats, libelous claims, [and] fraud claims.” Id. at 4.
The second part is titled “Statement of Fact Summary” and
consists of two pages of dense single spaced paragraphs

2

containing a rambling narrative that appears to allege the
breach of an implied contract between Plaintiffs and
undifferentiated defendants.

Plaintiffs make a further

unidentified claim that undifferentiated defendants “have gone
so far to start what is a ‘kickstarter’ campaign to help with
what is the Plaintiffs’ ‘mental behavior’ without any proper
licensing, education and training to make such a false and
illegal claim.”

Id. at 8.

The third part titled “Common

Commercial Licenses” consists entirely of content from a third
party website called “Music Services” that details different
types of commercial licenses in bullet point form.

Complt., pp

9-10.
The fourth part of the Complaint titled “Statement of the
Facts Breakdown & Brand Investigations” is a rambling narrative
which vaguely alleges, among other things, that undifferentiated
defendants “did libel the Plaintiff by creating erroneous
content on legally binding business correspondence, on a web
site online and in every search engine, making illegal medical
and clinical determinations about the plaintiff in writing and
again, as part of a web site it had created itself.”
17.

Id. at 10-

Plaintiffs’ seek damages for “loss of his reputation,

shame, mortification, and injury to his feelings” in the amount
of $350,000, plus damages at the full statutory rate.

3

Id. at

16.

Attached to the Complaint are approximately 20 pages of

unidentified exhibits.
The Court has reviewed the Complaint.

It is woefully

deficient under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) which
requires that the Complaint contain: “(1) a short and plain
statement of the grounds upon which the court’s jurisdiction
depends, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim
needs no grounds of jurisdiction to support it, (2) a short and
plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for judgment for the relief
the pleader seeks.”

The Complaint is so confusing and

unintelligible that this Court, as well as the Moving
Defendants, are left speculating what Plaintiff is alleging.
Accordingly, for the reasons above, IT IS
ON THIS 13th day of March 2015, hereby ORDERED that the
Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice.

Plaintiff

Lichterman will have 45 days to file an amended complaint which
shall consist of no more than five pages and shall state in
numbered paragraphs the claim(S) alleged with supporting facts.
To the extent Plaintiff needs additional pages to state his
claim, he shall provide a one-page statement with an
explanation.

No further pleadings by Plaintiff Lichterman will

be permitted at this time, and;

4

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Sunset Records,
Sunset Music and Sunset Corporation of America, Inc. shall have
21 days to retain counsel.

The attorney for each plaintiff

shall enter an appearance by April 3, 2015.

If an attorney

fails to enter an appearance for such plaintiff by that date,
that plaintiff will be terminated.

A corporation may not

represent itself in federal court.

See Rowland v. Cal. Men’s

Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 201-02 (1993); Van DeBerg v. Comm’r., 175
Fed. Appx. 539, 541 (3d Cir. 2006)(citation omitted).

s/Renée Marie Bumb
RENÉE MARIE BUMB
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5