IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-30199
Summary Calendar
TUAN TRUNG LE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; IMMIGRATION
AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; EXECUTIVE
OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION REVIEW; U.S.
BUREAU OF PRISONS; JANET RENO, United
States Attorney General; DORIS MEISSNER,
Respondents-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
(97-CV-341)
- - - - - - - - - -
February 10, 1999
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Petitioner-Appellant Tuan Trung Le appeals the district
court’s decision granting in part and denying in part his petition
for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and the district
court’s denial of his petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to grant him a bond
hearing. To the extent that Le appeals from the decision on his §
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.
47.5.4.
2241 petition, his appeal is untimely and is dismissed. FED. R.
APP. P. 4(a)(1).
Le’s appeal from the denial of his petition for writ of
mandamus was timely. Le argues that the district court abused its
discretion by not compelling the INS to conduct a bond hearing
regarding his continued detention pending deportation, as was
ordered in the district court’s decision on his § 2241 petition.
Mandamus may issue only when (1) the plaintiff has a clear right to
relief; (2) the defendant has a clear duty to act; and (3) there is
no other available remedy. Smith v. North La. Med. Review Ass’n,
735 F.2d 168, 172 (5th Cir. 1984). Because Le has not made the
requisite showing to obtain a writ of mandamus, 28 U.S.C. § 1361,
the district court did not err in denying relief.
DISMISSED in part, AFFIRMED in part.
2