Opinion
Case: 1:16-cv-00944
05-18-2016
Robert Heard, Petitioner, v. United States Attorney General, Respondent.
Assigned To : Unassigned
Assign. Date : 5/19/2016
Description: Pro Se Gen. Civ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Petitioner, proceeding pro se, has submitted a Mandamus action and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss the case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (requiring dismissal of a case upon a determination that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or is frivolous).
The extraordinary remedy of a writ of mandamus is available to compel an "officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to plaintiff." 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Petitioner bears a heavy burden of showing that his right to a writ of mandamus is "clear and indisputable." In re Cheney, 406 F.3d 723, 729 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). "It is well settled that a writ of mandamus is not available to compel discretionary acts." Cox v. Sec'y of Labor, 739 F. Supp. 28, 30 (D.D.C. 1990) (citing cases).
Petitioner sets out an assortment of disjointed statements and then asks "this court . . . to cause the United States Attorney General to ensue and perfect arrest warrants for [all] {everybody} (non lacking) whom are involved from the beginning to the end." Pet. at 2 (alterations in original). He has provided no basis for any relief, let alone the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. Hence, this case will be dismissed with prejudice. A separate order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/_________
United States District Judge Date: May 18, 2016