In re: Armando Zulveta

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000090788-2], denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000087549-2]; denying Motion for other relief [1000087579-2], denying Motion for other relief [1000087576-2], denying Motion for other relief [1000087574-2], denying Motion for other relief [1000087572-2], denying Motion for other relief [1000087571-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000102564-2] Originating case number: 6:15-cv-02880-HMH-KFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000140576]. Mailed to: A Zulveta. [17-1657]

Appeal: 17-1657

Doc: 15

Filed: 08/21/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1657

In re: ARMANDO DESPAIGNE ZULVETA,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (6:15-cv-02880-HMH-KFM)

Submitted: August 17, 2017

Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Armando Despaigne Zulveta, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Decided: August 21, 2017

Appeal: 17-1657

Doc: 15

Filed: 08/21/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Armando Despaigne Zulveta petitions for a writ of mandamus following the
dismissal of his civil complaint. Zulveta seeks an order from this court correcting various
mistakes allegedly made by the district court, directing the district court to recuse itself,
and granting his request to transfer his civil case to another circuit. We conclude that
Zulveta 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 of Durham, 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 sought by Zulveta is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly,
although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petitions for writ of
mandamus.

We further deny Zulveta’s motions to recuse.

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.
PETITIONS DENIED

2