UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7041
In Re: RONALD MILES,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-00-204-AM)
Submitted: September 3, 2003 Decided: October 7, 2003
Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Miles, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Ronald Miles petitions for a writ of mandamus. He seeks an
order to compel the district court to consider his Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b) motion as alleging fraud on the court rather than as a motion
for reconsideration.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a
clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan
Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus is a
drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S.
394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re
United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought by Miles is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant Miles’ motion to proceed
in forma pauperis, 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 the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2