Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05049/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05049-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 G:\PRO-SE\MJJ\CR.07\shapiro.dsm.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD SHAPIRO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUPERIOR

COURT, et al.,

Defendants. ____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-5049 MJJ (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL;

GRANTING LEAVE TO

PROCEED IN FORMA

PAUPERIS

(Docket No. 2)

Plaintiff filed this pro se civil action seeking a petition for a writ of mandamus to

compel the Small Claims Court of the Superior Court of the County of Santa Clara to release

a list of percipient witnesses to plaintiff. Federal district courts are without power to issue

mandamus to direct state courts, state judicial officers, or other state officials in the

performance of their duties. A petition for a writ of mandamus to compel a state court or

official to take or refrain from some action is frivolous as a matter of law. See In re

Campbell, 264 F.3d 730, 731-32 (7th Cir. 2001) (denying petition for writ of mandamus that

would order state trial court to give petitioner access to certain trial transcripts which he

sought in preparation for filing state post-conviction petition; federal court may not, as a

general rule, issue mandamus to a state judicial officer to control or interfere with state court

litigation); see Demos v. U.S. District Court, 925 F.2d 1160, 1161-62 (9th Cir. 1991)

Case 3:07-cv-05049-MJJ Document 4 Filed 10/25/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

Leave to amend is not warranted because plaintiff’s allegations establish that no

constitutional violation took place. 

2

Plaintiff correctly notes that as he is not a prisoner, the Court’s “(PR)” designation

should be removed from his case number. Furthermore, the partial and installment payment

provisions of the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act applicable to prisoners granted in forma

pauperis status, do not apply to plaintiff. 

G:\PRO-SE\MJJ\CR.07\shapiro.dsm.wpd 2

(imposing no filing in forma pauperis order); Dunlap v. Corbin, 532 F. Supp. 183, 187 (D.

Ariz. 1981) (plaintiff sought order from federal court directing state court to provide speedy

trial), aff'd without opinion, 673 F.2d 1337 (9th Cir. 1982). Accordingly, this action is

hereby DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.1

 

In light of plaintiff’s lack of funds, the application to proceed in forma pauperis is

GRANTED.2

The Clerk shall close the file, and terminate Docket No. 2.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 1024/07 _____________________________

MARTIN J. JENKINS

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05049-MJJ Document 4 Filed 10/25/07 Page 2 of 2