Ross v. United States Attorney's Office

Full title: MICHAEL S. ROSS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 20, 1975

511 F.2d 524 (9th Cir. 1975)

Opinion

No. 74-1919.

February 20, 1975.

Michael S. Ross, in pro. per.

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

Appeal from the District Court for the Central District of California.

Before KOELSCH and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and RENFREW,^_ District Judge.

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

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.