Case Name: In re Johnny Lee GORE, a/k/a Manager, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-10-24
Citations: 544 F. App'x 184
Docket Number: No. 13-2114
Parties: In re Johnny Lee GORE, a/k/a Manager, Petitioner.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 544
Pages: 184–185

Head Matter:
In re Johnny Lee GORE, a/k/a Manager, Petitioner.
No. 13-2114.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 22, 2013.
Decided: Oct. 24, 2013.
Johnny Lee Gore, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Johnny Lee Gore petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2013) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act, or an order vacating his sentence. We conclude that Gore 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).
We find the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Furthermore, Gore has not shown that he has a clear right to have his sentence vacated. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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.