Dennis Hollingsworth, et al v. USDCSF, et al

Filing 8

Order filed (BARRY G. SILVERMAN, RICHARD A. PAEZ and CARLOS T. BEA) Petitioners have not demonstrated that this case warrants the intervention of this court by means of the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. See Bauman v. United States Dist. Court, 557 F.2d 650 (9th Cir. 1977). Accordingly, the petition is denied. [7188589] (DAF)

Download PDF
D e n n i s Hollingsworth, et al v. USDCSF, et al Doc. 8 F IL E D U N IT E D STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 08 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U . S . C O U R T OF APPE A L S D E N N IS HOLLINGSWORTH, et al., Petitioners, v. U N IT E D STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF C A L IF O R N IA , Respondent, K R IS T IN M. PERRY; et al., Real Parties in Interest. N o . 10-70063 D .C . No. 3:09-cv-02292-VRW N o rth ern District of California, San Francisco ORDER B efo re: SILVERMAN, PAEZ and BEA, Circuit Judges. P etitio n ers have not demonstrated that this case warrants the intervention of th is court by means of the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. See Bauman v. U n ited States Dist. Court, 557 F.2d 650 (9th Cir. 1977). Accordingly, the petition is denied. KS/MOATT Dockets.Justia.com

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.