Opinion
No. 30556
June 15, 2010.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (FC-D No. 05-1-0352)
By: MOON, C.J., NAKAYAMA, ACOBA, DUFFY, and RECKTENWALD, JJ.
ORDER
Upon consideration of petitioner Vinh V. Nguyen's May 12, 2010 letter to the Chief Justice, which we treat as a petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that petitioner is not entitled to mandamus relief. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai'i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action.). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate court shall process petitioner's May 12, 2010 letter as a petition for a writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied without prejudice to seeking relief in the family court.