UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2299
In re: CHARLES PYNE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(Nos. 8:04-cr-00018-AW-3; 8:06-cv-02123-AW)
Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Pyne, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles Pyne petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking
an order directing the district court to recuse itself from any
further participation regarding his October 2012 motions for
expedited reconsideration based on fraud and for a transfer of
venue and vacating the court’s order denying those motions.
We conclude that Pyne is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. 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).
The relief sought by Pyne 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