Case ID: br_495/html/0099-01.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 Clinton C. BARLOW, Elmalean Bowser a/k/a Elmalean Austin, Petitioners.
    No. 13-1063.
    United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R.App. P. March 7, 2013.
    Opinion filed: March 27, 2013.
    Clinton C. Barlow, Trenton, NJ, pro se.
    Elmalean Bowser, Trenton, NJ, pro se.
    Albert Russo, Robbinsville, NJ, pro se.
    Before: AMBRO, SMITH and CHAGARES, Circuit Judges.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On January 10, 2013, petitioner Elmale-an Bowser filed an appeal in the District Court from the Bankruptcy Judge’s order dismissing her case. Her nephew, petitioner Clinton C. Barlow, apparently acting with power of attorney for Bowser, concurrently filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. Petitioners ask us to remove Bowser’s bankruptcy case from the assigned Bankruptcy Judge, alleging that he exhibited racial bias in violation of her constitutional rights.

Mandamus is a drastic remedy available in only the most extraordinary circumstances. In re Diet Drugs Prods. Liab. Litig., 418 F.3d 372, 378 (3d Cir.2005). Not only are Petitioners’ allegations entirely unsubstantiated, Bowser’s bankruptcy case is now on appeal to the District Court. A mandamus petition is not a substitute for an appeal. In re Kensington Int’l Ltd., 353 F.3d 211, 219 (3d Cir.2003). Accordingly, we will deny the mandamus petition.