Case ID: f-appx_14/html/0240-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re Isidoro RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner.
    No. 01-1774.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 29, 2001.
    Decided July 26, 2001.
    Isidoro Rodriguez, petitioner pro se.
    Before LUTTIG, DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Isidoro Rodriguez filed this mandamus petition requesting that this Court compel the district court to reinstate his complaint, order discovery, convene a jury to determine the facts and to comply with Rule 4(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Inter-American Convention on Letters of Rogatory, 14 Int’l Legal Materials. Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no other means by which the relief sought could be granted, In re Beard, 811. F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987), and may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Catawba Indian Tribe, 973 F.2d 1133, 1135 (4th Cir.1992). The party seeking mandamus relief carries the heavy burden of showing that he has “no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires” and that his entitlement to such relief is “clear and indisputable.” Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980).

Because Rodriguez has not shown that there is not an available remedy or that he is entitled to the requested relief, we deny his petition for mandamus relief. 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.