Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01915/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01915-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

MYRON A. PAYNE, 1:09-cv-01915-OWW-SMS-PC

Petitioner,

 ORDER DISREGARDING APPLICATION

vs. FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

(Doc. 10.)

MAESE, et al., 

ORDER FOR CLERK TO SERVE COPY

Respondents. OF THIS ORDER ON NINTH CIRCUIT

_____________________________/

Myron A. Payne (“petitioner”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this petition for writ of

mandate, or mandamus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361. On December 3, 2009, petitioner's petition

was denied and judgment was entered against petitioner in this action. (Docs. 7, 8.) On December

31, 2009, petitioner filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, along with

an application for a certificate of appealability pursuant to Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Appellate

Procedure. (Docs. 9, 10.) 

Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure requires that an applicant who files a

notice of appeal in a habeas proceeding must obtain a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. §

2253(c), or a statement why a certificate should not issue, from the district judge who rendered

judgment in the action. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). The district clerk must send the certificate or

statement to the court of appeals along with the notice of appeal. Id. Petitioner has requested a

1

Case 1:09-cv-01915-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 01/19/10 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

certificate of appealability for the notice of appeal he filed in this action on December 31, 2009. 

However, petitioner’s appeal concerns a petition for writ of mandate, or mandamus, under § 1361,

not a habeas proceeding. Therefore, Rule 22 does not apply to petitioner’s appeal, and petitioner’s

application for a certificate of appealability shall be disregarded. Petitioner is advised that his appeal

was processed and forwarded to the Ninth Circuit on January 11, 2010. (Doc. 12.)

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. Petitioner’s Application for a Certificate of Appealability is DISREGARDED;

and

2. The Clerk is DIRECTED to serve a copy of this order on the Ninth Circuit.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 19, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:09-cv-01915-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 01/19/10 Page 2 of 2