UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1138
In re: CORNELIOUS LEROY CHASE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
(8:11-cv-02486-RWT)
Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012
Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Cornelious Leroy Chase, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cornelious Leroy Chase petitions for a writ of
mandamus, requesting that the court direct one of the defendants
named in his pending 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action to file an
answer to his complaint. Mandamus is a drastic remedy to 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). Mandamus
relief is available only when there are no other means by which
the relief sought could be granted, and should not be used as a
substitute for appeal. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d at 517. The party
seeking mandamus relief bears the heavy burden of showing he has
no other adequate means to obtain the relief sought and that his
entitlement to relief is clear and indisputable. Allied Chem.
Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980).
Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that
Chase filed a motion identical to his current petition in the
district court on January 25, 2012. The district court denied
it on February 14. Because mandamus relief is not a substitute
form of appellate relief, we deny Chase’s petition. We likewise
deny his pending motions to appoint counsel and to set a trial
date. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
2
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
PETITION DENIED
3