The opinion of the court was delivered by: Seybert, District Judge:
On January 3, 2011, the pro se Plaintiff John T. Pickering-George (adopted) John R. Daley, Jr., ("Plaintiff") filed a Complaint against the defendants, The City of New York, Human Resources Administration, Family Independence Administration, Office of Legal Affairs, Bureau of Administrative Procedures, Human Resources Administration, and "Family Independence Administration Job Center Agencies Locations" (collectively, "Defendants") accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis.*fn1 The Court grants Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). However, for the reasons that follow, the Court sua sponte dismisses the Complaint without prejudice and with leave to pursue any valid claims he may have in state court.
Plaintiff, who is no stranger to this Court,*fn2 has filed another incomprehensible handwritten Complaint. Plaintiff's fifteen page Complaint is largely a compilation of citations to various, unrelated federal and state statutes and rules together with lists of incoherent statements containing legal jargon. For example, the Complaint begins with a "Statement of Claim" as follows:
1) MATTERS OF INJUNCTION, ASSOCIATED CONCEPTS OF LAW ADJUDICATION.
2) CLAIM OF DISCRIMINATION IN PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY RECEIVING FEDERAL ASSISTANCE.
3) CLAIM OF FACT AND ASSOCIATED CONCEPTS, JURY TRIAL DEMAND.
4) MATTERS OF EVIDENCE AND RECORD.
5) MATTERS OF RETROACTIVE BENIFITS [SIC] COMPLIANCE.
6) DUTIES OR OBLIGATIONS AND PERFORMANCE THEREOF.
7) CHARACTERIZATION OF ACTS OR CONDUCT AND STATING RESULT THEREOF.
8) CLAIM OF CIVIL, PUBLIC (ADJECTIVE) AND ASSOCIATED CONCEPTS.
9) FRAUD OF DECITFUL [SIC] PRACTICE OR MISREPRESENTATION.
10) PLEADING PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS, ACCUSATION ACCORDING TO LEGAL ENTITY EFFECTS. (Compl. at ...