Alison Levon Boyd

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998449461-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [998439143-2] Originating case number: 1:10-cv-00753-UA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998472131] [10-2121]

Alison Levon Boyd

Doc. 0

Case: 10-2121 Document: 7

Date Filed: 11/24/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2121 In Re: ALISON LEVON BOYD, Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:10-CV-00753-UA) Submitted: November 18, 2010 AGEE, Circuit Decided: Judges, and November 24, 2010 HAMILTON, Senior

Before SHEDD and Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alison Levon Boyd, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-2121 Document: 7

Date Filed: 11/24/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Alison Levon Boyd petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court and the magistrate judge to address a specific issue and to order his immediate release. relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only Dist. in extraordinary 426 circumstances. 394, 402 Kerr v. United States v. We conclude that Boyd is not entitled to mandamus

Court, 333

U.S. 509,

(1976); (4th when Cir. the

United 2003).

States

Moussaoui, mandamus

F.3d is

516-17 only

Further, has a

relief

available

petitioner

clear right to the relief sought.

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Mandamus may not be

Ass'n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). used as a substitute for appeal. 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).

In re Lockheed Martin Corp.,

The relief sought by Boyd is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in We

forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 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.

PETITION DENIED

2