UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 3, 2008
MILES O. BONTY PLAINTIFF,
R INDERMILL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR NOTICE OR MANDATE (Docs. 95)
Plaintiff Miles O. Bonty ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 1, 2008, plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the court "provide plaintiff with a notice or mandate to move CCI prison officials to issue all of plaintiff's legal property to allow him to continue meaningful and maximum communication with the courts" (Doc. 95). Plaintiff states that he was recently transferred to CCI and that he has not yet received all his legal material.
District courts have "original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff." 28 U.S.C. § 1361. "Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy . . . [and] is appropriately issued only when (1) the plaintiff's claim is clear and certain; (2) the defendant official's duty to act is ministerial, and so plainly prescribed as to be free from doubt; and (3) no other adequate remedy is available." Barron v. Reich, 13 F.3d 1370, 1374 (9th Cir. 1994) (internal citations and quotations omitted).
This court has no jurisdiction over state officials. 28 U.S.C. § 1651; see also Demos v. United States Dist. Court for E. Dist. Of Wash., 925 F.2d 1160, 1161 (9th Cir. 1991). Therefore, plaintiff's motion would have to be denied, other fatal deficiencies notwithstanding.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.