Case ID: f-appx_600/html/0126-02.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: Chase Carmen HUNTER, Petitioner. In re: Chase Carmen Hunter, Petitioner.
    Nos. 15-1016, 15-1018.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 16, 2015.
    Decided: April 21, 2015.
    Chase Carmen Hunter, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Petitions denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Chase Hunter petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing all of the district courts in this Circuit, except for the District of South Carolina, to grant her access to their electronic filing systems. We conclude that Hunter 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, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (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).

The relief sought by Hunter is not available by way of mandamus. She cites neither statutory law nor judicial precedent demonstrating a clear right to file electronically. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny her mandamus petitions, deny her motion to voluntarily dismiss, and deny her motions for extension of time as moot. 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.