Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

123 F. App'x 569

In Re: Jaffe v.

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided February 22, 2005

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2005-02-22

Relies on Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Allied Chemical Corporation v. Daiflon Inc · In Re Diana R Beard et Als

Decided 2005-02-22

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Allen V. Jaffe petitions this court for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court to vacate its October 5, 2004 order imposing sanctions against him and to order the presiding judge to recuse himself. Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976). Mandamus relief is available only when there are no other means by which the relief sought could be granted, In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987), and may not be used as a substitute for appeal, In re Catawba Indian Tribe, 973 F.2d 1133, 1135 (4th Cir.1992). 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, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980). We deny Jaffe’s 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.

¶2 PETITION DENIED

/123/fappx/569 · .json · Public domain