By petition dated February 21, 2024, petitioner Antonio Carl Thompson, who signed the petition as Anton Money Karl Emperor Traveler,^[FN1] seeks leave to assume the name "Aureillio Godana Favorito Ai Prosperity Health 999999999 Kaem'peror."

In paragraph 19 of the petition, petitioner affirmed he had not previously filed a name change petition in any court. However, the court's records reflect a prior petition for similar relief was made, where petitioner sought leave to change their name to:

"AMS I am God Aurelio Abiola Abioya Alnokh Artist Valuable Worthy Blueprints Engineer Real Estate Owner Vacationist Scientist Sucess Stock Market Investor Rose Prosperity Prosperous Money Powerful Respect Art Car Seller Tomika Riker Godana Nimah Prosperity Digital Coin NTF AI Drop Shipping SUV Shortscar Exotic Passport Green Gold Tycoon 999 Karl Emperor."

This Court denied that petition, holding that "petitioner's proposed name includes several words, including 'Engineer,' 'Scientist,' and 'Emperor' which if permitted may 'be tantamount to the bestowal of an apparent title of authority'" (In re Thompson, index no NC-000152-24/NY [Civ Ct, NY County Jan. 24, 2024] [Ally, J.], citing Matter of Thompson, 82 Misc 2d 460, 461 [Civ Ct, NY County, 1975] and Matter of Jama, 51 Misc 2d 9 [Civ Ct, NY County 1966]). Because petitioner failed to advise the Court of the details surrounding the prior name change, as required by paragraph no. 19 of the petition, the petition should be denied (see CRL § 63 [requiring that the Court must be satisfied "that the petition is true"]).

The Court must also be satisfied that "there is no reasonable objection to the change of name proposed" (CRL § 63). The new proposed last name of "Kaem'peror" appears to be a version of emperor or a blending of "Karl Emperor" as requested in the prior petition. As such, the Court finds that, similar to the previous petition, the use of the name requested by petitioner that includes the word "emperor" would be "tantamount to the bestowal of an apparent title of [*2]authority" (Matter of Thompson, 82 Misc 2d 460, 461 [Civ Ct, NY County, 1975]) and grant of a certain nobility, which courts have found to be prohibited by the United States Constitution (see Matter of Jama, 51 Misc 2d 9 [Civ Ct, NY County 1966]).

The Court also finds persuasive authority for the proposition that use of numbers, as requested here in the first part of the proposed last name of "999999999," may also constitute a reasonable objection under New York law. As other courts have held, "it is not unreasonable to conclude that the usage of numbers for designating or describing persons might cause inherent confusion in public records" (In re Ritchie, 159 Cal App 3d 1070, 1074, 206 Cal Rptr 239, 241 [Cal Ct App 1984] [denying application for leave to change petitioner's name to "III"]; see also Application of Dengler, 287 NW2d 637, 639 [Minn 1979] [denying application for leave to change petitioner's name to "1076"]).

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and dismissed. This constitutes the decision, order and judgment of the court.