UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1634
In Re: MICHAEL D. WILKINS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(BK-95-33189-T)
Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 22, 1998
Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael D. Wilkins, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Michael D. Wilkins has filed a petition for a writ of manda-
mus, asking this court to order (1) a federal magistrate judge to
decide whether Wilkins’ civil rights were violated during the
course of bankruptcy proceedings; (2) the United States Attorney to
investigate his claims; and (3) the bankruptcy trustee to secure
property that should be a part of the bankruptcy proceedings.
Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary
circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394,
402 (1976). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no
other means by which the relief sought could be granted, see In re
Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987), and may not be used as a
substitute for appeal. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958,
960 (4th Cir. 1979). The party seeking mandamus relief carries the
heavy burden of showing that he has “no other adequate means to
attain the relief he desires” and that his right to such relief is
“clear and indisputable.” Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449
U.S. 33, 35 (1980). Wilkins has not made such a showing. According-
ly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. We also deny Wil-
kins’ motion for judicial redress and 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