Case Name: Julian Edward ROCHESTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. Strom THURMOND, Jr., U.S. Attorney; Jennifer Aldrich, U.S. Attorney, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-20
Citations: 115 F. App'x 174
Docket Number: No. 04-6813
Parties: Julian Edward ROCHESTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. Strom THURMOND, Jr., U.S. Attorney; Jennifer Aldrich, U.S. Attorney, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 174–175

Head Matter:
Julian Edward ROCHESTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. Strom THURMOND, Jr., U.S. Attorney; Jennifer Aldrich, U.S. Attorney, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 04-6813.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 10, 2004.
Decided: Dec. 20, 2004.
Julian Edward Rochester, Appellant pro se.
Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Julian Edward Rochester appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge denying Rochester's petition for writ of mandamus. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. See Rochester v. Thurmond, No. CA-03-3373-2-20AJ (D.S.C. Apr. 19, 2004). 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.
DISMISSED
The district court did not address Rochester's demand for the recusal of certain judges. Our review of the record discloses that Rochester failed to make the requisite showing of impartiality, and denial of mandamus relief on this point was also appropriate. See United States v. Cherry, 330 F.3d 658, 665 (4th Cir.2003).