Court Opinion

ID: 9408612
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-13 15:02:12.581739+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:45.611203
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-125     Document: 8    Page: 1    Filed: 07/13/2023

          NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

  United States Court of Appeals
      for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

                  In re: ERIC FLORES,
                         Petitioner
                  ______________________

                         2023-125
                  ______________________

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States
Court of Federal Claims in Nos. 1:11-cv-00110-GWM and
1:11-cv-00127-GWM, Judge George W. Miller.
                  ______________________

               ON PETITION AND MOTION
                  ______________________

PER CURIAM.
                        ORDER
    Before the court are Eric Flores’ petition for a writ of
mandamus, ECF No. 2, motion for “enforcement of original
money judgment,” ECF No. 3, and motion for leave to pro-
ceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 4.
    Mr. Flores filed two complaints in the United States
Court of Federal Claims, which were consolidated and dis-
missed for lack of jurisdiction. On November 8, 2022, Mr.
Flores moved to set aside the judgment, which the Court of
Federal Claims denied on November 22, 2022.
   Mr. Flores appealed that ruling to this court. On De-
cember 27, 2022, the Court of Federal Claims denied
Case: 23-125    Document: 8       Page: 2   Filed: 07/13/2023

2                                              IN RE: FLORES

several post-judgment submissions and directed the clerk
of that court to accept no further filings in those cases. On
March 14, 2023, this court dismissed Mr. Flores’ appeal.
This petition was filed the following day.
     Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, available only
where the petitioner shows: (1) a clear and indisputable
right to relief; (2) there are no adequate alternative legal
channels through which he may obtain that relief; and
(3) the grant of mandamus is appropriate under the cir-
cumstances. See Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S.
367, 380-81 (2004).
     Mr. Flores seeks to compel the Court of Federal Claims
to “file” his “motion for enforcement of original money judg-
ment” that he “attempted” to file in November 2022. How-
ever, the Court of Federal Claims’ December 27, 2022,
order considered and rejected that motion as an attempt to
merely relitigate his motion to set aside the judgment.
    The court has considered Mr. Flores’ other arguments
but concludes that he has not shown entitlement to man-
damus relief and therefore denies his petition.
    Accordingly,
    IT IS ORDERED THAT:
    (1) The petition is denied.
    (2) All pending motions are denied.
                                       FOR THE COURT

July 13, 2023                          /s/ Jarrett B. Perlow
    Date                               Jarrett B. Perlow
                                       Clerk of Court