In Re: David Wattleton v.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1326
In Re: DAVID WATTLETON,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(5:05-ct-00052-H)
Submitted: July 22, 2013 Decided: July 31, 2013
Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Wattleton, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Earl Wattleton petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order directing the district court to “return any
monies taken from petitioner’s institutional inmate trust fund
account and cease taking money via the consent form.” We
conclude that Wattleton is 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). Moreover, 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 Wattleton 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