Case ID: f-appx_516/html/0100-01.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, III, Petitioner.
    No. 13-1320.
    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.
    James B. Clark, III, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Newark, NJ, for Respondent.
    Before: AMBRO, SMITH and CHAGARES, Circuit Judges.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On January 10, 2013, Elmalean Bowser, petitioner Clinton C. Barlow’s aunt, filed an appeal in the District Court from the Bankruptcy Judge’s order dismissing her case. Shortly thereafter, Barlow, apparently acting as Bowser’s legal representative, filed a petition for writ of mandamus, asking us to compel the District Court and other federal agencies to accept process of his federal civil tort claim.

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). Barlow’s federal civil tort claim was denied by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts on January 24, 2013, and he was advised of his right to file suit in District Court within six months of that date. Nothing in the record indicates that Barlow has exercised that right, let alone been precluded from doing so. Accordingly, we will deny the mandamus petition.