Case Name: In re: Philip M. KLEINSMITH, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-20
Citations: 115 F. App'x 171
Docket Number: No. 04-2349
Parties: In re: Philip M. KLEINSMITH, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 171–171

Head Matter:
In re: Philip M. KLEINSMITH, Petitioner.
No. 04-2349.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 16, 2004.
Decided: Dec. 20, 2004.
Philip M. Kleinsmith, Petitioner pro se.
Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, 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Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Philip M. Kleinsmith petitions for writ of mandamus. He seeks an order enjoining the district court from requiring pro bono service as a condition of membership in the court's Bar.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Further, 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). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).
The relief sought by Kleinsmith is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, 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