Case Name: In re: Randy L. THOMAS, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-09-01
Citations: 342 F. App'x 866
Docket Number: No. 09-1827
Parties: In re: Randy L. THOMAS, Petitioner.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 342
Pages: 866–867

Head Matter:
In re: Randy L. THOMAS, Petitioner.
No. 09-1827.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 26, 2009.
Decided: Sept. 1, 2009.
Randy L. Thomas, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Randy L. Thomas petitions for a writ of mandamus review of a February 13, 2008, 2008 WL 413855, district court order. We conclude that Thomas 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 Thomas 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.