Opinion
21-1944
12-22-2021
In re: BRETT-ANDREW: HOUSE OF NELSON, Petitioner.
Brett-Andrew: House of Nelson, Petitioner Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: December 21, 2021
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:21-cv-01292-MGL)
Brett-Andrew: House of Nelson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM.
Brett-Andrew: House of Nelson petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to confirm a purported arbitration award. We conclude that Nelson is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown, LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and "has no other adequate means to attain the relief [he] desires," Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted), and 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 Nelson is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, 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.