Case Name: In re: Henry Clifford BYRD, Sr., Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-03-31
Citations: 91 F. App'x 293
Docket Number: No. 03-7902
Parties: In re: Henry Clifford BYRD, Sr., Petitioner,
Judges: Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 91
Pages: 293–294

Head Matter:
In re: Henry Clifford BYRD, Sr., Petitioner,
No. 03-7902.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 25, 2004.
Decided March 31, 2004.
Henry Clifford Byrd, Sr., Petitioner pro se.
Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, 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Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Henry Clifford Byrd, Sr., petitions for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition seeking an order directing the district court not to construe his complaint as one filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000).
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 Byrd is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition. 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