Case Name: In Re: Christopher Bernard JONES, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-12-18
Citations: 258 F. App'x 545
Docket Number: No. 07-1930
Parties: In Re: Christopher Bernard JONES, Petitioner.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 258
Pages: 545–546

Head Matter:
In Re: Christopher Bernard JONES, Petitioner.
No. 07-1930.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 13, 2007.
Decided: Dec. 18, 2007.
Christopher Bernard Jones, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Christopher Bernard Jones petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking review of several district court decisions in a pending civil action. We conclude that Jones is not entitled to mandamus relief.
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). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. 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. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).
The relief sought by Jones 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.