Case Name: In re Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-08-25
Citations: 582 F. App'x 196
Docket Number: No. 14-1668
Parties: In re Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 582
Pages: 196–196

Head Matter:
In re Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner.
No. 14-1668.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 21, 2014.
Decided: Aug. 25, 2014.
Gary Buterra Williams, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Gary Buterra Williams petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking review of the district court's order denying Williams' motion for recusal of the district court judge. We conclude that Williams 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). The relief sought by Williams is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.