Opinion
No. 19-1109
04-10-2019
In re: JAMES DOW VANDIVERE, Petitioner.
James Dow Vandivere, Petitioner Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-hc-02017-D) Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Dow Vandivere, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
James Dow Vandivere petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order directing the district court to explain why it denied his motion to set aside judgment. We conclude that Vandivere is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (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 Vandivere is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a 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