UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 15, 2013
ANDREW A. CEJAS,
R H TRIMBLE, ET. AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION (ECF No. 15)
Plaintiff Andrew A. Cejas ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 7.)
Plaintiff initiated this action on December 28, 2011. (ECF No. 1.) On May 29, 2012, the Court reviewed Plaintiff's Complaint, found that it did not meet the pleading requirements under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), dismissed it and ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint no longer than twenty-five (25) pages in length, containing a short and plain statement of related claims. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff has since filed a First Amended Complaint that has yet to be screened. (ECF No. 14.)
On September 10, 2012 Plaintiff filed a motion for class certification.
Plaintiff is not an attorney and he is proceeding without counsel. A pro se litigant simply cannot "fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class." Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4); Fymbo v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 213 F.3d 1320, 1321 (10th Cir. 2000). While a non-attorney proceeding pro se may bring his own claims to court, he may not represent others. E.g., Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 664-65 (9th Cir. 2008); Fymbo, 213 F.3d at 1321; Johns v. County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1997); C. E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987).
Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for class action certification is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.