Edwards v. Sisto

Filing 35

USCA ORDER - Petition for mandamus is denied (sis, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2009)

Case: 09-73202

12/11/2009

Page: 1 of 2

DktEntry: 7161113

F IL E D
U N IT E D STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEC 11 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U . S . C O U R T OF APPE A L S

I n re: JAMES EUGENE EDWARDS; et a l.

N o . 09-73202 D .C . Nos. 3:08-cv-02841-WHA 3:08-cv-02842-WHA N o r th e r n District of California, S a n Francisco ORDER

JA M E S EUGENE EDWARDS; 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, D .K . SISTO, Real Party in Interest.

B efo re: GOODWIN, RYMER and CLIFTON, 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. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot.
rb/MOATT

Case: 09-73202

12/11/2009

Page: 2 of 2

DktEntry: 7161113

N o motions for reconsideration, rehearing, clarification, or any other su b m issio n s shall be filed or entertained in this closed docket.

rb/MOATT

2

0 9 -7 3 2 0 2