UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7572
In Re: CHRISTOPHER R. WOODBERRY,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(4:05-cv-01440-TLW)
Submitted: December 20, 2006 Decided: January 11, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher R. Woodberry, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Christopher R. Woodberry petitions for a writ of
mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on
his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and motion for recusal. He seeks an
order from this court directing the district court to act.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a
clear and indisputable right to the relief sought and there are no
other adequate means for obtaining the relief. Allied Chem.
Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980); In re Beard, 811
F.2d 818, 827 (4th Cir. 1987). Further, mandamus is a drastic
remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v.
United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976).
The district court dismissed Woodberry’s § 2255 motion on
November 3, 2006, and Woodberry’s mandamus petition is therefore
moot. Moreover, Woodberry does not have a clear or indisputable
right to recusal. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed
in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We
deny as moot Woodberry’s motion to expedite. 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 -