In Re: Bernard McFadden v. , 683 F. App'x 230 ( 2017 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-2313
In re: BERNARD MCFADDEN,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:13-cv-02290-JMC)
Submitted: March 30, 2017 Decided: April 3, 2017
Before TRAXLER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bernard McFadden, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Bernard McFadden petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the
district court to rule on documents he filed subsequent to the denial of relief on his
underlying 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We conclude that McFadden is not
entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976);
United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus
relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re
First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Mandamus may not be
used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir.
2007).
The relief sought by McFadden is not available by way of mandamus.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2