In Re: Carol Pizzuto v.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1242
In re: CAROL L. PIZZUTO; GREG GIVENS; DENNIS A. GIVENS,
Petitioners.
No. 13-1243
In re: CAROL L. PIZZUTO; GREG GIVENS; DENNIS A. GIVENS,
Petitioners.
No. 13-1244
In re: CAROL L. PIZZUTO; GREG GIVENS; DENNIS A. GIVENS,
Petitioners.
No. 13-1245
In re: CAROL L. PIZZUTO; GREG GIVENS; DENNIS A. GIVENS,
Petitioners.
On Petitions for Writ of Mandamus
(Nos. 5:12-cv-00145-FPS-JES; 5:12-cv-00149-FPS-JES; 5:08-cv-
00025-FPS-JSK; 5:12-cv-00155-FPS-JES)
Submitted: July 25, 2013 Decided: July 29, 2013
Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Carol L. Pizzuto, Greg Givens, Dennis, A. Givens, Petitioners
Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated cases, Petitioners have filed
petitions for writs of mandamus or prohibition seeking orders
requiring removal of a magistrate judge and correction of
alleged procedural errors in district court cases. We conclude
that Petitioners are not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
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 Petitioners is not available by
way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petitions. 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.
PETITIONS DENIED
3