Case Name: In re: William LEWIS, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-08-05
Citations: 141 F. App'x 134
Docket Number: No. 05-6571
Parties: In re: William LEWIS, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 141
Pages: 134–135

Head Matter:
In re: William LEWIS, Petitioner.
No. 05-6571.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 27, 2005.
Decided Aug. 5, 2005.
William Lewis, Petitioner pro se.
Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(e).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
William Lewis petitions for writ of mandamus, seeking an order compelling the United States Parole Commission to release him on parole. Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). Moreover, jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against an agency of the United States lies with the district courts, not this court. 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (2000); 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (2000) (providing that this court's authority under All Writs Act extends only to issuance of writs necessary or appropriate in aid of appellate jurisdiction).
The relief sought by Lewis is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant Lewis' motion 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