Case Name: In re Don BOYD, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-12-26
Citations: 491 F. App'x 431
Docket Number: No. 12-2124
Parties: In re Don BOYD, Petitioner.
Judges: Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 491
Pages: 431–432

Head Matter:
In re Don BOYD, Petitioner.
No. 12-2124.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 20, 2012.
Decided: Dec. 26, 2012.
Don Boyd, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Don Boyd petitions for a writ of mandamus, asking that this court compel the district judge and magistrate judge to re-cuse themselves from his civil action against several Defendants. Boyd has also moved to proceed in forma pauperis. We conclude that Boyd 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, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (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). Boyd has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief.
Accordingly, although we grant Boyd's application to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.