WATSON v. TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY (2020)

Plaintiff-Appellant Mark Joseph Watson filed a complaint against Defendant-Appellee Texas State University, alleging that he was given a trespass warning by university police and requesting $2,531,350.00 in damages under legal theories involving admiralty law, copyright infringement, the Uniform Commercial Code, fictional personhood, and contractual interpretation of criminal laws. The district court dismissed the complaint as frivolous, noting Watson's reliance on meritless legal theories associated with the sovereign citizen movement. Watson now appeals.

After reviewing Watson's submissions and the record, we too conclude that his claims are frivolous and entirely without merit. We therefore dismiss his appeal as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; Crain v. Comm'r, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417-18 (5th Cir. 1984). Because he has not heeded a previous sanction warning, we sanction Watson in the amount of $500, payable to the Clerk of this court. See Anderson v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 953 F.3d 311, 315 (5th Cir. 2020). Until our sanction is paid in full, Watson is barred from filing any pro se civil appeal in this court or any pro se initial civil pleading in any court that is subject to our court's jurisdiction, without advance written permission of a judge of the court in which he seeks to file. Watson is again warned that any future frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings may result in the imposition of further sanctions.

DISMISSED as frivolous; sanction IMPOSED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.