N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C U IT

In re : KER

M IT ALEXANDER ; B R ADLEY W INC HELL,

______________________________ KER M IT ALEXANDER ; B R ADLEY W INC HELL,

M ova nts-Pe titione rs,
v. UNITED STATES DISTRIC T C OUR T FOR THE NOR THER

N DISTR IC T OF C ALIFOR

NIA, SAN FR

A NC ISC O, R e sponde nt, M IC HAEL ANGELO M OR ALES; TIEQUON AUNDR

AY C OX; ALB ER T GREENW OOD B R OW

N; M ITC HELL C ARLTON SIM S; DAVID A. R ALEY; R OB ER T G. FAIR

B ANK; KEVIN C OOPER ; SC OTT LYNN PINHOLSTER ; W ILLIAM C H ARLES PAYTON; R OYAL HAYES; R

IC HARD DELM ER B OYER ; R ONALD LEE DEER E; HAR VEY LEE HEISHM AN III; ANTHONY J. SULLY; ALB ER T C UNNINGHAM ; DOUGLAS S M IC KEY; HEC TOR

JUAN AYALA; R IC HARD GONZALES SAM AYOA; R AYNAR D PAUL C UM M INGS; No. 19-70232 D.C . Nos. 3:06-c v-00219-R S

3:06-c v-00926-R S
ORDER 

# FIL ED
SEP 16 2021 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALSC ONR

AD ZAPIEN; R ONALDO AYALA; JOHN LOUIS VISC IOTTI,

Pla i ntiffsR e a l Partie s in Inte re st, R ALPH M . DIAZ, Ac ting Se c re ta ry for the C a lifornia

De pa rtm e n t of C orre c tions and R e h a bilita tion; RONALD DAVIS, W arde n, W arde n of Sa

n Que ntin Prison; GAVIN NEW SOM , Gove rnor of the Stat e of C a lifornia ,

De fe nda n tsR e a l Partie s in Inte re st.

Pe tition for W

rit of M anda

m us Subm itte d Se p te m

be r 16, 2020 * San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : W . FLETC HER , FORR EST ** , and VANDYKE, C irc uit Judge s . Pe titione rs, who a

re fam ily m e m be rs of the vic tim s of pla intiffs M ic h a e l M ora l e s a nd Tie q uon C ox, a sk this c ourt for a writ of m andate or prohibition. Pe titione rs sought a

n orde r re quiring thedistric t c ourt to (1) va c ate a ll sta y s of
e xe c ution; (2) c onditionally re fra in from

issuing further sta

y s or injunc tions of

* The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).

** Form e rly

known a s Da

nie l le J. Hunsa

ke r. 2e xe c utions or prepa ra tions; a nd (3) inc lude in a

ny future sta y orde r an e xpira

tion pe riod of 90 da

y s. Afte r Pe titione rs file d the ir pe tition in this c ourt, Gove rnor Gavin Ne wsom

issue d an Exe c utive Orde r im

posing a m o ra torium

on a ll
e xe c utions, repe a l ing C a lifornia ’ s le tha l -inje c tion re gula tions, a nd c losing the de a th c ham

be rs. In light of the

Exe c utive Orde r, a ll Pla intiffs a nd a ll De fe nda

nts file d a stipula te d dism issa l in the distric t c ourt. The re a fte r, De fe nda nts file d a
m otion to dism

iss Pe titione r’ s m anda

m us pe tition. 1 (Dkt. No. 41). Pe titione rs do not opposethis m o t ion. W e the re fore GR

ANT the m otion to DISM ISS this pe t ition. Ea c h pa rty sha l l be ar its own c osts a

nd fe e s. The pe tition is DISM ISSE D.

1 B e fore filing the ir m otion to dism iss, De fe nda

nts file d a re q ue st for judic ia l notic e re ga

rding the ir a

nswe r to Pe titione r’ s writ of m anda m us. (Dkt. No. 17). B e c a use we d i sm iss Pe titione rs’ a ppe a l a s m oot, we ne e d not rule on the re que s t for judic ia l notic e . 3