Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00338/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00338-3/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

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD EARL LEGARDY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. )

)

)

SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE OF )

CALIFORNIA, )

)

Respondent. )

)

)

___________________________________ )

1:07-cv-00338-AWI WMW

ORDER ADOPTING

FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS RE

DISMISSAL OF PETITION

FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

Petitioner is proceeding pro se on a petition for writ of mandamus, requesting that this

court issue an order requiring the California Superior Court to take certain actions.

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 

On May 17, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein. 

These findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice to the

parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty

Case 1:07-cv-00338-AWI-WMW Document 12 Filed 12/21/07 Page 1 of 2
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 2

days. Petitioner filed objections on July 25, 2007. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)C) this court has

conducted a de novo review of this case. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708

F.2d 452, 454 (9 Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the th

findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. As

explained by the Magistrate Judge, a petition for writ of mandamus is not available as a

means to challenge state court actions. A petition for writ of mandamus is only available in

federal court to request the federal court compel a United States officer or employee, not a

state officer or employee, to perform a duty. See 28 U.S.C. § 1361. 

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on 

May 17, 2007, are a adopted in full;

2. The Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction;

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this

case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 20, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00338-AWI-WMW Document 12 Filed 12/21/07 Page 2 of 2