MEYERS v. CLARKE (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

David MEYERS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. Director Harold CLARKE, Respondent - Appellee.

No. 18-7138

Decided: April 29, 2019

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

David Meyers, Appellant Pro Se.

David Meyers appeals the district court's order dismissing his petition for a writ of mandamus. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion. See Schlagenhauf v. Holder, 379 U.S. 104, 111 n.8, 85 S.Ct. 234, 13 L.Ed.2d 152 (1964) (stating that issuance of writ of mandamus is a matter of discretion with the court to which the petition is addressed). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Meyers v. Clarke, 7:18-cv-00435-JPJ-PMS (W.D. Va. Sept. 7, 2018). We also deny Meyers’ motions to seal the case and for in camera assistance. 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.

AFFIRMED

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network