In Re: Jianqing Wu

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999756302-2]; denying Motion for initial hearing en banc (FRAP 35) [999756310-2] Originating case number: 8:15-cv-01924-PWG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999895670]. Mailed to: J. Wu. [16-1161]

Appeal: 16-1161

Doc: 9

Filed: 07/25/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1161

In re:

JIANQING WU, and all others similarly situated,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Submitted:

July 21, 2016

(8:15-cv-01924-PWG)

Decided:

July 25, 2016

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jianqing Wu, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1161

Doc: 9

Filed: 07/25/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Jianqing Wu petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an
order compelling the district court to follow federal and local
rules of procedure in managing his case and for recusal of the
district

court

judge.

We

conclude

that

Jianqing

Wu

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).
Jianqing Wu has failed to demonstrate that he is entitled
to the relief he seeks.

Accordingly, we deny Jianqing Wu’s

motion for initial hearing en banc and deny the petition for
writ of mandamus.
facts

and

materials

legal
before

We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions

are

adequately

this

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

2