Case: 14-135 Document: 5 Page: 1 Filed: 06/04/2014 NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ IN RE JOEL L. BELING, Petitioner. ______________________ 2014-135 ______________________ On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States Patent and Trademark Office in Nos. 91203884 and 92055374. ______________________ ON PETITION ______________________ Before NEWMAN, RADER, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER Joel L. Beling’s petition for writ of mandamus and “petition for a writ of certiorari” relate to ongoing proceed- ings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”). Beling’s petitions ask this court for various relief, including to direct the TTAB to reopen discovery, to “create new laws” based on the proposals he suggested before the TTAB, to review his requests for disqualifica- tion, and to refund certain fees he paid. In addition, Beling moves to stay proceedings before the TTAB pend- Case: 14-135 Document: 5 Page: 2 Filed: 06/04/2014 2 IN RE BELING ing this court’s decision on the writ and for leave to pro- ceed in forma pauperis. The remedy of mandamus is available only in ex- traordinary situations to correct a clear abuse of discre- tion or usurpation of judicial power. In re Calmar, Inc., 854 F.2d 461, 464 (Fed. Cir. 1988). A party seeking a writ bears the burden of proving that it has no other means of securing the relief desired, Mallard v. United States District Court, 490 U.S. 296, 309 (1989), and that the right to issuance of the writ is “clear and indisputable,” Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980). In this present case, Beling has not demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to relief. In addition, pro- ceedings are ongoing before the TTAB, and Beling can seek further review at the conclusion of such proceedings. See 15 U.S.C. § 1071. As to many of the issues raised, Beling has not shown that any alleged error could not be reviewed through the ordinary process. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. (2) The motion for stay is denied. (3) The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. (4) To the extent that Beling’s petition seeks en banc review, he should file a timely petition for rehearing en banc. Case: 14-135 Document: 5 Page: 3 Filed: 06/04/2014 IN RE BELING 3 FOR THE COURT /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court s30
Inre: Beling
Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Date filed: 2014-06-04
Citations: 562 F. App'x 984
Copy CitationsCombined Opinion