Ray v. Schomig

Filing 31

USCA ORDER (11-73427): Petition is denied. (ysS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/9/2012)

Download PDF
Case: 11-73427 01/09/2012 ID: 8024432 DktEntry: 3 Page: 1 of 2 FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 09 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS In re: EDWARD VINCENT RAY, Jr. No. 11-73427 EDWARD VINCENT RAY, Jr., D.C. No. 3:10-cv-01582-SI Northern District of California, San Francisco Petitioner, v. ORDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent, MATTHEW CATE, Real Party in Interest. Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. On December 6, 2011, the district court ruled on petitioner’s pending motions relating to his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. To the extent that petitioner requests that this court compel the district court to rule on petitioner’s pending motions, that request for relief is moot. To the extent petitioner requests that this court compel the district court to order the real party in interest, Matthew LSC/MOATT Case: 11-73427 01/09/2012 ID: 8024432 DktEntry: 3 Page: 2 of 2 Cate, to answer his habeas corpus petition, petitioner has 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. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot. DENIED. LSC/MOATT 2 11-73427

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


Why Is My Information Online?