Pursuant to Federal Rule 42. The Dark Empire Rothschild et al and Slave Trade Le’ The Edmond de Rothschild Group Negro Sherlock Holmes Case of “The Patrons Rustic Foreign Empire Banker” U.S. Docket No. 4:16-CV-01774 Hamilton et al vs. Federal Reserve Bank et al

In The United States District Court

For The Southern District of Texas

          Houston Division

Slave Negro Louis Charles Hamilton II

Pro Se Plaintiff                                                                     4:2016-CV-00964

            Vs.                                                                              Motion to Consolidation

United States of America et al

To the Honorable Court Justice Kenneth Michael Hoyt, and To the Honorable Court Justice Melinda Harmon

            Comes Now Slave Negro Pro Se Plaintiff “Louis Charles Hamilton II” United States of America Navy herein and 44.5 Million DNA Negro

“Plaintiff” collectively  Files Pursuant to Federal Rule 42. Motion to Consolidation all 4 case’s as one with one still pending for consolidation approval of the parties as requires being official per

 “Court Order”, the “Subject Matter” is simple “Slavery 101” start date August 20^th 1619, all Defendant described in this motion for consolidation are in fact the

 “Slave Regime” so no need looking for the (RICO) white only KKK parties, evidenced or witnesses, whom all unknowingly and unaware each role they played singularly or collectively being directly party thereof in Civil Rights violations as described and direct at the

 Plaintiff and Plaintiffs herein collectively still derive from (MIA) 13^th amendment and elusive 14^th amendment violation all defending parties being responsible for each aspect of such fully legal described in the draft describing the plight of keeping and maintaining

 “Slavery” and ignorant thereof of a few Negro parties herein being involved in an ongoing continual “Slave Regime, corruption on a grand (RICO) hostile in indirect violence being a party in slaver it cover up, all directed at Pro Se Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) described as Follows case in this consolidation listed as such

                                                                        1.

Plaintiff: Louis Charles Hamilton, II, Jeffery Tavery, Robert Vaughan, Avery Brown and Keno Miller

Defendant: United States of America et al "Chief Defendant, United States of America Congress and United States of America Supreme Court

Case Number: 4:2016-CV-01354  Filed: May 11, 2016

Court: Texas Southern District Court  Office: Houston Office

County: Harris  Presiding Judge: Melinda Harmon Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights

Cause of Action:42:1981

                                                                        2.

Hamilton v. Czyzyk Filed: April 5, 2016 as 4:2016-CV-00994

Plaintiff: Louis Charles Hamilton, II

Defendant: Joe Czyzyk , U.S. Vets United States Veterans Initiative et al , US Vets Houston @ Midtown Terrace Suites et al and others

Cause Of Action: Civil Rights Act

                                                                        3.

Hamilton v. United States Of America et al Filed: April 4, 2016 as 4:2016-CV-00964

Plaintiff: Louis Charles Hamilton, II

Defendant: United States Of America, State Of Texas, Harris County Texas and others

Cause Of Action: Other Statutory Actions

                                                                        4.

Plaintiff: Louis Charles Hamilton, II Civil Action U.S. Docket No 4: 16-CV-01774

Defendant: The Federal Reserve Bank, et al

Civil Rights Act

With a 5^th pending once filed in approximately 12 days all being the same subject matter, “Slavery 101”

All having the same witnesses, experts testimony, and official certified government Records of Laws, clearly in some case dating back to 1865’,  and the constitution records, with 1619 – February 7^th being the main meat of said hostile continual human rights violation “Slavery Regime” as further state

(a) Consolidation. When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions;

it may order all the actions consolidated; and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.

(a)(1) A motion to consolidate cases shall be heard by the judge assigned to the first case filed. Notice of a motion to consolidate cases shall be given to all parties in each case. The order denying or granting the motion shall be filed in each case.

(a)(2) If a motion to consolidate is granted, the case number of the first case filed shall be used for all subsequent papers and the case shall be heard by the judge assigned to the first case. The presiding judge may assign the case to another judge for good cause.

State trial of any claim, cross claim, counterclaim, or third party claim, or of any separate issue or of any number of claims, cross claims, counterclaims, third party claims, or issues.

All Plaintiff(s) collectively described sound reasoning for such a granted consolidates 1 presiding Honorable Judge in all 4 matter’s furtherance’s as follows: