In Re: David Conley v. , 585 F. App'x 56 ( 2014 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1831
In re: DAVID CONLEY,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(5:13-ct-03251-F)
Submitted: October 21, 2014 Decided: October 23, 2014
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Conley, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Conley petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking
orders prohibiting the district court from denying his post-
judgment motion to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint
and directing the district court to certify a class and grant
relief on his underlying complaint. We conclude that Conley is
not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
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). 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 Conley is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of
mandamus. 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