Case ID: f2d_511/html/0524-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

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.
    
      
       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.