In re: Beasley v. , 123 F. App'x 143 ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1847
In Re: JAMES BEASLEY,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-99-1568)
Submitted: December 10, 2004 Decided: March 18, 2005
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Beasley, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James Beasley has filed a petition for writ of mandamus
seeking an order from this court that would effectively reinstate
the payment of supplemental security income to Beasley--a matter
that has been fully litigated. Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be
used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). “[C]ourts are extremely
reluctant to grant a writ of mandamus.” In re Ford Motor Co., 751
F.2d 274, 275 (8th Cir. 1984). In seeking mandamus relief, Beasley
carries the heavy burden of showing that he has no other adequate
means to attain the relief sought and that his right to such relief
is clear and indisputable. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860
F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). We find that Beasley has failed to
meet this burden and thus we dismiss the petition. We deny
Beasley’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DISMISSED
- 2 -