UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1808
In re: ABDULLAH RASOOL SHAKOOR,
Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
(7:97-cr-00064-BO)
Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 1, 2010
Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Abdullah Rasool Shakoor, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Abdullah Shakoor petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order instructing the district court to act on his
Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We conclude that Shakoor is not
entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v.
Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further,
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).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal.
In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).
Here, the record reflects that the district court acted on
Shakoor’s Rule 60(b) motion on October 29, 2009. Though Shakoor
asserts that the district court failed to act on the entirety of
his claims, our review of the district court’s order indicates
that the court denied all claims raised by Shakoor. Further
relief 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
2
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3