Case: 25-107 Document: 18 Page: 1 Filed: 02/04/2025

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

In Re MARTIN AKERMAN, I, Petitioner ______________________

2025-107 ______________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the Merit Sys- tems Protection Board in Nos. DC-1221-22-0257-W-2 and DC-1221-22-0445-W-2. ______________________

ON MOTION AND PETITION ______________________

Before LOURIE, MAYER, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER Martin Akerman, I, petitions this court for a writ of mandamus to compel the Merit Systems Protection Board to take certain action in his Board appeals, Nos. DC-1221- 22-0257-W-2 and DC-1221-22-0445-W-2. Mr. Akerman also moves for various relief, including to hold this matter “in abeyance for 180 days” so that other of his cases may “proceed to resolution.” ECF No. 15 at 4. Mr. Akerman’s petition seeks to compel the Board to rule on his stay requests and to document a status confer- ence held with the administrative judge. The All Writs Act Case: 25-107 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 02/04/2025

2 IN RE AKERMAN

provides that federal courts “may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy availa- ble only where the petitioner shows: (1) a clear and indis- putable right to relief; (2) no adequate alternative avenue for relief; and (3) that mandamus is appropriate under the circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004). At a minimum, Mr. Akerman has not shown a clear and indisputable right to the relief re- quested. We thus deny mandamus relief. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition and all pending motions are denied. FOR THE COURT

February 4, 2025 Date