In re: Harry Nie

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1105
In re: HARRY NIE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(2:11-cv-00666-RBS-DEM)
Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 22, 2013
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Harry Nie, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Harry Nie petitions for a writ of mandamus, requesting
that this court examine the district court’s denial of his 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. We have already done so. See
Nie v. Clarke, No. 12-7644, 2012 WL 6604913 (4th Cir. Dec. 19,
2012) (per curiam). We decline Nie’s invitation to revisit the
district court’s ruling under the guise of entertaining a writ
of mandamus, given that 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). Indeed,
mandamus relief is available only when there are no other means
by which the relief sought could be granted, and it should not
be used as a substitute for appeal. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d at 517.
Accordingly, although we grant Nie leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, we deny his petition for writ of mandamus. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

-- 2 of 2 --