You are seriously delusional. So you agree it's not certified, after just saying it was. Judges don't "accept" cases for filing, the clerk does. The Judge hasn't read your lawsuit, no need to until a motion has been filed. Even then, he won't read all of what you put in there. The vast majority of it is irrelevant and subject to a motion to strike.
Counsel must be appointed to represent the interests of the class. This must be a very experienced lawyer that has done this before. It's 100% mandatory. And those lawyers will cost hundreds of thousands. You are not legally allowed to represent the class, or anyone for that matter. You are not counsel, unless you are a licensed lawyer. This is basic stuff.
Do you have the names and addresses of the class members? Notice will need to be mailed to each one of them, letting them know of the lawsuit and giving them the option to opt out of the lawsuit.
You seem confused about 23(a), look up the Goldfish class action lawsuit about Soybeans or the Mesothelioma Class Action lawsuit. A Class can include people that don't even realize they are in the class. This class is way to big to name everyone.
LOL.
"The Magistrate Court RECOMMENDS the District Court DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's cause of action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2)(B)"
"The court first notes that Plaintiff's Complaint is somewhat incoherent. The body of Plaintiff's Complaint is 49 pages long, but at least 43 pages are comprised of block quotations from various cases, statutes, and international sources. However, Plaintiff provides no explanation as to how the quotations support any of his claims. Similarly, Plaintiff provides no explanation as to how the facts he has provided support or relate to his causes of action".
"Despite the Complaint's length, Plaintiff provides little to no coherent factual basis for his claims."
"Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a single cause of action that is plausible on its face. Accordingly, the Complaint should be dismissed."
MARK LANE
UNITES STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I will be going up there tomorrow. It was just a complaint, I haven't even submitted everything yet. And first off, is this the DEA Lawsuit or the Austin PD Lawsuit. Because if this is the Austin PD Lawsuit, I said myself (in this thread) that it wasn't written for Federal court and that I didn't have a single cause of action section on there and that it had to be rewritten. So if this is the Austin PD lawsuit, everything that judge said I actually said myself just a few days ago.
If that is the DEA Lawsuit:
First,
Read Cruz V Beto. I will bring it up there for them tomorrow. And the fact that he said it was incoherent sounds like colusion. The DEA and DOJ and pretty much every news agency knows about this case, and it is clearly not incoherent. They all understand it. So for a judge to claim the DEA lawsuit is incoherent, that would have to be colusion. If it is the Austin PD Lawsuit, I completely understand, because I expected to just argue everything in the Municipal Court, but they decided to take it to Federal.
Second,
I haven't shown them Normaco V DEA yet, or the DOJ Statements, or the DEA's statements that support my case. That will all go up there tomorrow. So, if somehow they are actually just missing the coherency of the argument, it will be revealed to them tomorrow. They see me as some guy that is saying the DEA is running a Monopoly. But when I go up there tomorrow with Documents where the DEA themselves say they have been running a Monopoly, as well as the DOJ and the Federal District Court in DC, they will have a better understanding.
And,
If it were dismissed without prejudice, it would not be hard to reopen once I present this stuff to them. And I don't even have to provide a reason for refiling it.
You keep acting like any time something is filed like they got me.
You did the same thing when they filed a scheduling order. This is not irregular. They just expect it to all be in one document. I was just filing a complaint though, the supporting case law is not even in there yet.
So calm down, and stop acting like they beat me by filing something when you know they didn't, but you wish they did.
Also,
Third,
If this is the DEA lawsuit, you realize that in one post you say "They won't even read it until after the summons are filed" and then the very next post you proved yourself wrong, by quoting a judge that had read it. So I don't even see why you think you are such a great source of know how, when you literally in one post say that they won't do something and in the next post quote where they did what you say they don't do. Lol
