¶1 Russell McBee petitions for a writ of mandamus. He seeks an order compelling the district court to provide him with documents and legal materials related to his 1999 criminal case.
¶2 Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987).
¶3 McBee has not established a clear right to the requested relief. He has not shown he has made a request to the district court for the copies of documents or legal materials. Nor has he shown he is entitled to such documents. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of *846 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.
¶4 PETITION DENIED.