In re: Gary William

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:13-cv-00276-HEH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999421926]. Mailed to: Gary Williams. [14-1668]

Appeal: 14-1668

Doc: 6

Filed: 08/25/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1668

In re:

GARY BUTERRA WILLIAMS,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(No. 3:13-cv-00276-HEH)

Submitted:

August 21, 2014

Decided:

August 25, 2014

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Buterra Williams, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-1668

Doc: 6

Filed: 08/25/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Gary Buterra Williams petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking review of the district court’s order denying Williams’
motion for recusal of the district court judge.

We conclude

that Williams is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only

in

Dist.

extraordinary

Court,

Moussaoui,
mandamus

426

333

relief

circumstances.

U.S.

F.3d
is

394,

509,

402

516-17

available

(1976);
(4th

only

clear right to the relief sought.

Kerr

Cir.

when

the

v.

United

United

States

States

2003).

v.

Further,

petitioner

has

a

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

mandamus.

sought

by

Williams

is

not

available

by

way

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in

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

of

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

2