¶1 Henry Clifford Byrd, Sr., petitions for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition seeking an order directing the district court *294 not to construe his complaint as one filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000).
¶2 Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 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). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).
¶3 The relief sought by Byrd is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition. 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