U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1975

Ross v. United States Attorney's Office

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided February 20, 1975

511 F.2d 524; 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 16016 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Opinion

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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.