In re: Anthony Cook v. n

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion to procced in forma pauperis granted. Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) and other pending motions denied [999941769-2]; [999994341-2]; [999945827-2]. Originating case number: 4:16-cv-02939-MBS-TER. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000026503]. Mailed to: Anthony Cook, Lawrence Crawford, David Duren and Yahya Muquit. [16-2141]

Appeal: 16-2141

Doc: 31

Filed: 02/21/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2141

In re:
ANTHONY COOK; DAVID DUREN; YAHYA MUQUIT; LAWRENCE
CRAWFORD,
Petitioners.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Submitted:

February 16, 2017

(4:16-cv-02939-MBS-TER)

Decided:

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge,
HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

DUNCAN,

February 21, 2017

Circuit

Judge,

and

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Cook, David
Petitioners Pro Se.

Duren,

Yahya

Muquit,

Lawrence

Crawford,

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-2141

Doc: 31

Filed: 02/21/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

seek

forms

PER CURIAM:
Petitioners
including

writs

Petitioners

of

also

several

mandamus

seek

to

against

proceed

of

mandamus

multiple

in

forma

relief,

federal

pauperis

judges.
and

have

filed motions for a ruling of law, for recusal, and for this
court

to

reconsider

its

previous

orders

in

this

and

related

appeals.
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).
We

have

reviewed

Petitioners

not

filings

conclude

that

extraordinary

circumstances exist warranting mandamus relief.

To the extent

challenge

the

established

and

that

Petitioners

have

Petitioners’

district

court’s

rulings

in

their

respective district court actions, or this court’s prior orders,
mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal.

In re

Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).
to

the

judges

extent
of

this

participation

Petitioners
court
in

be

their

ask

that

ordered

district
to

respective
2

court

recuse
actions

judges

themselves
or

And
or

from

appeals,

Appeal: 16-2141

Doc: 31

Filed: 02/21/2017

Pg: 3 of 3

Petitioners have not established extra-judicial bias.

See In re

Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826-27 (4th Cir. 1987).
Accordingly, although we grant Petitioners’ applications to
proceed

in

Petitioners’

forma

pauperis,

other

pending

we

deny

motions.

mandamus
We

dispense

relief

and

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

3