Roberts v. Lindeman et al

Filing 4

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 1 Motion for Writ of Prohibition. This case is closed and the Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 7/23/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

2
3

HASSAN ROBERTS,

4
5

Plaintiff,
vs.

6
7
8
9
10
11

TRACIE K. LINDEMAN; and
L. HAMILTON,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

3:13-cv-00679-RCJ-WGC
ORDER

Pro se Plaintiff Hassan Roberts, a prisoner at the Northern Nevada Correctional Center,

12
13

petitions for a writ commanding Defendants, as clerks at the Nevada Supreme Court, to docket a

14

filing in which he appears to seek the “ouster” of various state court judges. (Mot. for Writ, ECF

15

No. 1; Mot. for Writ, ECF No. 1-1; Mot. for Writ, ECF No. 1-2). Plaintiff alleges that

16

Defendants have refused and returned the filing. (Mot. for Writ, ECF No. 1, at 2). For the

17

reasons stated herein, Plaintiff’s petition is denied, and this case is closed.
18
19

The All Writs Act provides that “[t]he Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of

20

Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and

21

agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651. Although the All Writs Act

22

authorizes writs of mandamus, federal district courts are without power to issue mandamus to

23

direct state courts, state judicial officers, or other state officials in the performance of their
24
25

duties, and a petition for such a writ is legally frivolous. See Demos v. U.S. District Court, 925

26

F.2d 1160, 1161 (9th Cir. 1991) (“We further note that this court lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ

27

of mandamus to a state court.”); Clark v. Washington, 366 F.2d 678, 681 (9th Cir. 1966) (“The

28

federal courts are without power to issue writs of mandamus to direct state courts or their judicial

1

1
2

officers in the performance of their duties[.]”). Accordingly, this Court lacks jurisdiction to grant
the relief Plaintiff seeks, and this action must be dismissed.

3
4

CONCLUSION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for a writ of prohibition (ECF No. 1)

5

is DENIED. This case is closed and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: _______________________
July 23, 2014

9
10
11

_____________________________________
ROBERT C. JONES
United States District Judge

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

2