Case Name: In re: Michael Allen KOKOSKI, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-03-09
Citations: 122 F. App'x 685
Docket Number: No. 05-6037
Parties: In re: Michael Allen KOKOSKI, Petitioner,
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 122
Pages: 685–685

Head Matter:
In re: Michael Allen KOKOSKI, Petitioner,
No. 05-6037.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 24, 2005.
Decided: March 9, 2005.
Michael Allen Kokoski, Petitioner pro se.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Michael Allen Kokoski petitions for writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his pending Rule 60(b) motion and motion to recuse the magistrate judge. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Mandamus is a drastic remedy, to be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). We note that the district court recently issued an order denying Kokoski's recusal motion, rendering this portion of Kokoski's mandamus petition moot. Moreover, because there has been recent significant action in the district court, we find no undue delay. Accordingly, we deny Kokoski's petition for writ of mandamus. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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