Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01535/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01535-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Muhammed Mahdee Abdullah
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1535

In Re: MUHAMMED MAHDEE ABDULLAH,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(5:04-CR-00371-F-1)

Submitted: June 17, 2010 Decided: June 25, 2010

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Muhammed Mahdee Abdullah, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-1535 Doc: 6 Filed: 06/25/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Muhammed Mahdee Abdullah petitions for a writ of 

mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to 

correct an alleged clerical error in an order. We conclude 

Abdullah 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). 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 Abdullah is not available by way 

of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, 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 the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

Appeal: 10-1535 Doc: 6 Filed: 06/25/2010 Pg: 2 of 2