In Re: Momolu Sirleaf
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999818193-2], denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999863160-2]; denying Motion for injunctive relief pending appeal (FRAP 8) [999958485-3]; denying Motion to extend filing time [999958485-2] Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00301-MHL-RCY,3:15-cv-00552-MHL-RCY,3:15-cv-00339-MHL-RCY,3:15-cv-00338-MHL-RCY,3:15-cv-00340-MHL-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: John King, Aaron Lewis, Eric Prosha, Peter Rosas, Ryan Sessoms, Momolu Sirleaf & Ray Watson. [16-1531]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
In Re: MOMOLU V.S. SIRLEAF; ERIC L. PROSHA; JOHN
AARON LEWIS; PETER ROSAS; RYAN SESSOMS; RAY WATSON,
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(3:15-cv-00301-MHL-RCY; 3:15-cv-00552-MHL-RCY; 3:15-cv-00339MHL-RCY; 3:15-cv-00338-MHL-RCY; 3:15-cv-00340-MHL-RCY)
November 30, 2016
December 21, 2016
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Momolu V.S. Sirleaf; Eric L. Prosha; John King; Aaron Lewis;
Peter Rosas; Ryan Sessoms; Ray Watson, Petitioners Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
order directing the district court judge to recuse herself in
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).
The party seeking issuance of
the writ must have no other adequate means to attain relief, and
he bears the burden of showing that his right to the writ is
clear and indisputable.
See Moussaoui, 333 F.3d at 517; In re
Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).
We conclude that
Petitioners fail to make the required showing.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus,
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?