Ross v. United States Attorney's Office

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: 1 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. 2 Affirmed. * The Honorable Charles B. Renfrew, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation