CHRISTIAN JOUBERT, Personal Representative of the Maria Joubert Estate Acting pro se v. Brown Williamson Tobacco Corp.;

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHRISTIAN JOUBERT, Personal
Representative of the Maria Joubert Estate
Acting pro se and individually,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BROWN WILLIAMSON TOBACCO
CORP.; et al.,
Defendants.
No. 10-35713
D.C. No. 2:10-cv-00887-RSM
MEMORANDUM*
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
FILED
JAN 12 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-35713 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 of 2 --