UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-2307
In Re: HOWELL W. WOLTZ,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:08-cv-00438-WEB)
Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 26, 2009
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Howell W. Woltz, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Howell W. Woltz petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order removing the district court judge from his case
due to alleged bias. We conclude that Woltz 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). Woltz fails to demonstrate a clear right to
the relief sought. Accordingly, we deny Woltz’s motion to
proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss 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 DISMISSED
2