Case Name: In re: Ricardo Gutierrez DEPINERES, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-05-12
Citations: 131 F. App'x 401
Docket Number: No. 05-6025
Parties: In re: Ricardo Gutierrez DEPINERES, Petitioner.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 131
Pages: 401–402

Head Matter:
In re: Ricardo Gutierrez DEPINERES, Petitioner.
No. 05-6025.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 28, 2005.
Decided: May 12, 2005.
Ricardo Gutierrez DePineres, Petitioner pro se.
Before WILLIAMS, 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Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Ricardo Gutierrez DePineres petitions for writ of mandamus. He requests that this court review the district court's actions following the remand of DePineres' 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) case for further proceedings, to determine whether the district court is complying with this court's mandate.
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 DePineres is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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