Case: 21-106 Document: 8 Page: 1 Filed: 12/23/2020

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

In re: LUCAS DANIEL REGAN, Petitioner ______________________

2021-106 ______________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. ______________________

ON PETITION ______________________

PER CURIAM. ORDER Lucas Daniel Regan, I, files a submission received De- cember 8, 2020 stating that the “one and only supreme law of [his] religion has which is as follows . . . DO WHAT YOU WANT,” Pet. at 4, and appears to argue that operation of the Supremacy Clause and the First Amendment prohibit laws that impinge on his religious exercise. We regard the submission as seeking mandamus relief. We must first address our jurisdiction to consider Rev. Regan’s submission. See PIN/NIP, Inc. v. Platte Chem. Co., 304 F.3d 1235, 1241 (Fed. Cir. 2002). This is a court of limited subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1295. Rev. Regan does not identify any decision from which he Case: 21-106 Document: 8 Page: 2 Filed: 12/23/2020

2 IN RE: REGAN

appeals or petitions for review, much less a decision within the confines of section 1295. The All Writs Act provides that the federal courts “may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their re- spective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and prin- ciples of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). As that statute makes clear, however, the Act is not itself a grant of jurisdiction. See Clinton v. Goldsmith, 526 U.S. 529, 534–35 (1999). It confines issuing such relief only in cases that would fall within this court’s limited jurisdiction if a proper appeal had been perfected. Because Rev. Regan identifies no such case, we must also deny any mandamus relief. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition is dismissed. FOR THE COURT

December 23, 2020 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court s24