In re: Daniel J. Willi

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999660148-2], denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999622129-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999632241-2]; granting Motion for leave to file [999622137-2], granting Motion for leave to file [999622131-2] Originating case number: 4:15-mc-00001-H Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999683953]. Mailed to: Daniel Johnson Willis 105 Cherry Street Trenton, NC 28585. [15-1788]

Appeal: 15-1788

Doc: 13

Filed: 10/22/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1788

In re:

DANIEL J. WILLIS,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(4:15-mc-00001-H)

Submitted:

October 20, 2015

Decided:

October 22, 2015

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daniel Johnson Willis, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1788

Doc: 13

Filed: 10/22/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Daniel J. Willis petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking
an order directing the district court to act on his motion to
file

a

new

entitled

to

civil

action.

mandamus

We

relief.

conclude
Mandamus

that

Willis

relief

is

is

a

not

drastic

remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances.
Kerr

v.

States

U.S.
v.

Dist.

Court,

Moussaoui,

333

426

U.S.

394,

402

F.3d

509,

516-17

(1976);

(4th

Cir.

United
2003).

Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner
has a clear right to the relief sought, which Willis has not
demonstrated.

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135,

138 (4th Cir. 1988).

To the extent Willis argues delay, we find

the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district
court.

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma

pauperis and grant Willis’s motions for leave to file a petition
for writ of mandamus, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus
and amended petition.

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

2