# Christian Joubert v. Brown Williamson Tobacco Corp.

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · January 12, 2012 · 466 F. App'x 588

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/620881

## Case

- **Full name:** Christian JOUBERT, Personal Representative of the Maria Joubert Estate Acting Pro Se and Individually, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BROWN WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP.; Et Al., Defendants
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 12, 2012
- **Citations:** 466 F. App'x 588
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Goodwin, Wallace, McKeown
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/620881

## Opinion text

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 12 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHRISTIAN JOUBERT, Personal No. 10-35713
Representative of the Maria Joubert Estate
Acting pro se and individually, D.C. No. 2:10-cv-00887-RSM

Plaintiff - Appellant,
MEMORANDUM *
v.

BROWN WILLIAMSON TOBACCO
CORP.; et al.,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ricardo S. Martinez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 19, 2011 **

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Christian Joubert appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his

action alleging state law claims arising from the death of his mother. We have

*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction. Shanks v. Dressel, 540 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir.

2008). We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s dismissal without

leave to amend. Gordon v. City of Oakland, 627 F.3d 1092, 1094 (9th Cir. 2010).

We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Joubert’s action for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction because Joubert alleged neither a federal question nor complete

diversity between the parties. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1333-1332.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Joubert’s action

without leave to amend after concluding that amendment would be futile. See

Simon v. Hartford Life and Accident Ins. Co., 546 F.3d 661, 664 (9th Cir. 2008)

(“[C]ourts have routinely adhered to the general rule prohibiting pro se plaintiffs

from pursuing claims on behalf of others in a representative capacity.”)

Joubert’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

2 10-35713

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/620881. Public record. Not legal advice.