Ross v. United States Attorney's Office

511 F.2d 524, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 16016

Opinion

511 F.2d 524

Michael S. ROSS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE for the CENTRAL DISTRICT
OF CALIFORNIA including Messrs. Robert C. Bonner and Michael
Sulner, Assistant and Deputy Attorney, Criminal Complaints,
Defendant-Appellee.

No. 74--1919.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Feb. 20, 1975.

Michael S. Ross, in pro. per.

Clarke A. Knicely, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Before KOELSCH and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and RENFREW,* District judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

The well-settled principle that mandamus does not lie to compel a United States District Attorney to perform a discretionary act (Inmates of Attica Correctional Facility v. Rockefeller, 477 F.2d 375 (2nd Cir. 1973)) is dispositive of this appeal.

Affirmed.

* The Honorable Charles B. Renfrew, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation