Shaheed v. Chhabria

Filing 7

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge James Donato on 2/6/17. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KARRIEM SHAHEED,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.
VINCE CHHABRIA,
Defendant.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 16-cv-07208-JD

12
13
14

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. He has been granted
leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
DISCUSSION

15
16

STANDARD OF REVIEW

17

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek

18

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

19

§ 1915A(a). In its review, the Court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims

20

which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek

21

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se

22

pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th

23

Cir. 1990).

24

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the

25

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Although a complaint “does not need detailed

26

factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff’s obligation to provide the ‘grounds’ of his ‘entitle[ment] to

27

relief’ requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a

28

cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above

1

the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations

2

omitted). A complaint must proffer “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its

3

face.” Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has explained the “plausible on its face”

4

standard of Twombly: “While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they

5

must be supported by factual allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court

6

should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement

7

to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009).
LEGAL CLAIMS

9

Plaintiff seeks relief against Judge Vince Chhabria regarding his handling of Case No. 13-

10

cv-5751-VC. The federal mandamus statute provides that “[t]he district courts shall have original

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

8

jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the

12

United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.” 28 U.S.C. § 1361.

13

Mandamus relief is only available to compel an officer of the United States to perform a duty if:

14

(1) the plaintiff's claim is clear and certain; (2) the duty of the officer is ministerial and so plainly

15

prescribed as to be free from doubt; and (3) no other adequate remedy is available. See Fallini v.

16

Hodel, 783 F.2d 1343, 1345 (9th Cir. 1986) (citations omitted). However, a federal district court

17

lacks authority to issue a writ of mandamus to another district court. See Mullis v. U.S.

18

Bankruptcy Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1393 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing Lewis v. Green, 629 F. Supp. 546,

19

553 (D.D.C. 1986)).

20

In Case No. 13-cv-5751-VC, the Court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment

21

and closed the case. Docket No. 58 in Case No. 13-cv-5751-VC. The Ninth Circuit denied

22

plaintiff’s appeal finding that the district court properly granted summary judgment. Docket No.

23

66 in Case No. 13-cv-5751-VC. Plaintiff pursued his remedy which was to file an appeal, which

24

was denied, though he may continue to appeal the Supreme Court. This action seeks a “horizontal

25

appeal” and such collateral attacks on decisions of the federal court are foreclosed by the Ninth

26

Circuit. See Mullins, 828 F.2d at 1393. This action is dismissed for failure to state a claim.

27

Because it would be futile to allow further amendments this case is dismissed with prejudice.

28
2

CONCLUSION

1
2

1.

This action is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim.

3

2.

The Clerk shall close the file.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated: February 6, 2017

6
7
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

KARRIEM SHAHEED,

Case No. 16-cv-07208-JD

Plaintiff,
5
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

6
7

VINCE CHHABRIA,
Defendant.

8
9
10

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

That on February 6, 2017, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by
placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

16
17
18

Karriem Shaheed ID: H-65017
CSATF State Prison Bldg. 3 - A3 - 3L
PO Box 5248
Corcoran, CA 93212

19
20
21

Dated: February 6, 2017

22
23

Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court

24
25
26
27

By:________________________
LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable JAMES DONATO

28
4