In Re: Binder v.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1099
In Re: LEILA P. BINDER,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-02-21)
Submitted: March 4, 2003 Decided: March 14, 2003
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leila P. Binder, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Leila P. Binder petitions for a writ of mandamus. Mandamus
relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to
the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 860 F.2d
135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and
should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. See Kerr v.
United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard,
811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Mandamus may not be used as a
substitute for appeal. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d
958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought by Binder 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 the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2