UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-2063

In Re: GREGORY RICE,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (8:09-cv-01322-PJM)

Submitted: November 19, 2009 Decided: December 1, 2009

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory Rice, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Gregory Rice petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking

an order to enforce a security agreement in a civil action

dismissed by the district court. We conclude that Rice is not

entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner

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

Loan Ass’n,

(4th Cir. 1988). Further,

mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in

extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court,

(1976); In re Beard,

(4th

Cir. 1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for

appeal. In re United Steelworkers,

(4th Cir.

1979).

The relief sought by Rice is not available by way of

mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the 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.

PETITION DENIED

2