                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 19-1109


In re: JAMES DOW VANDIVERE,

                    Petitioner.



                 On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-hc-02017-D)


Submitted: April 4, 2019                                          Decided: April 10, 2019


Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.


Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.


James Dow Vandivere, Petitioner Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

      James Dow Vandivere petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order

directing the district court to explain why it denied his motion to set aside judgment.

We conclude that Vandivere is not entitled to mandamus relief.

      Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary

circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v.

Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available

only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. &

Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Mandamus may not be used as a

substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).

      The relief sought by Vandivere is not available by way of mandamus.

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition

for a 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
