Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Shapat Ahdawan Nabaya petitions for a writ of quo warranto challenging the district court’s authority over criminal charges against him. He also filed several motions seeking to enjoin the district court’s proceedings. We conclude that Na- *198 baya is not entitled to quo warranto or injunctive relief.

A private individual lacks standing to institute a quo warranto proceeding. Newman v. United States ex rel. Frizzell, 238 U.S. 537, 545-46, 35 S.Ct. 881, 59 L.Ed. 1446 (1915). Thus, Nabaya’s petition must be denied. We deny as moot Nabaya’s motion to stay the district court proceedings pending resolution of this petition.

Nabaya has also filed motions challenging the jurisdiction of the district court and seeking an order from this court enjoining or dismissing the district court proceeding. Nabaya has failed to demonstrate any extraordinary circumstances warranting such relief. We therefore deny his motions for injunctive relief.

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of quo warranto and deny Nabaya’s motions for a stay and for in-junctive relief. 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