In re: Pritt v.

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-4087 In Re: THOMAS S. PRITT, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-98-176) Submitted: April 27, 2000 Decided: May 2, 2000 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas S. Pritt, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Thomas S. Pritt has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus from this Court. His petition challenges the district court’s order denying attorney’s fees following his acquittal on multiple crim- inal charges. We deny the writ. Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Ct, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no other means by which the relief sought could be granted, see In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987), and may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re Catawba Indian Tribe, 973 F.2d 1133, 1135 (4th Cir. 1992). Pritt could have appealed the denial of his motion, but he failed to do so.* Accordingly, we deny Pritt’s petition for mandamus relief. We dispense with oral argu- ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre- sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED * To the extent that Pritt intended this petition as a notice of appeal from the district court's denial of his mandamus peti- tion, his appeal is untimely. See Fed. R. App. P. 4. 2