UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7530
In Re: JAMES E. MACDONALD,
Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
(2:06-cv-1013-PMD)
Submitted: February 22, 2007 Decided: March 1, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James E. MacDonald, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James E. MacDonald petitions for a writ of mandamus
directing the district court to grant MacDonald’s motion to vacate,
28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), because the Government filed an untimely
response to his motion. We conclude that MacDonald is not entitled
to mandamus relief.
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). Further, mandamus is a
drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. 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. In
re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
Therefore, the relief sought by MacDonald 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
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
- 2 -