Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01170/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01170-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

)

CHRISTOPHER JONES, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

G. MITCHELL, et.al., )

) 

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

CV F- 05-1170 REC DLB P 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTIONS TO AMEND MAILING

ADDRESSES AND TO JOIN

ACTIONS

[DOCS 8, 9]

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

sec. 1983. Plaintiff has sought leave of court to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff originally filed

this action on behalf of himself and five (5) other state prisoners. On October 12, 2005, the Court

ordered that each plaintiff should proceed in their own separate action. Notwithstanding this order,

on October 20, 2005, plaintiff filed a documents entitled “Motion to Amend the Mailing address of

plaintiffs” in which he requests that the Court serve him with all orders in the other plaintiff’s

actions. On October 20, 2005, plaintiff also filed a motion to join the complaints. On November 8,

2005, plaintiff submitted amended complaints on behalf of John Westlake, Alfred McLeod and

Alfonso Saise.

Plaintiff, who is a non-lawyer, may not represent anyone but himself in court. Johns v.

County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997); C. E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States,

Case 1:05-cv-01170-LJO-DLB Document 11 Filed 11/16/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 2

818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987). In addition, as the Court has already informed plaintiff, it has

been the Court’s experience that an action brought by multiple plaintiff’s proceeding pro se in which

one or more of the plaintiffs are incarcerated presents procedural problems that cause delay and

confusion. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motions must be denied. The Clerk of the Court is directed to

return to plaintiff the amended complaints submitted on behalf of Westlake, McLeod and Saise.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 14, 2005 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01170-LJO-DLB Document 11 Filed 11/16/05 Page 2 of 2