JEFFRIES v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS (2019)

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed August 17, 2018 be affirmed. The district court correctly denied appellant's petition for a writ of mandamus. The remedy of mandamus “is a drastic one, to be invoked only in extraordinary situations.” Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 34, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980) (per curiam). Here, the district court properly held that appellant has not shown a “clear and indisputable” right to mandamus relief, because he has not demonstrated that he has a clear right to relief, that appellee has a clear duty to act, and that there is no other adequate remedy available to him. See Power v. Barnhart, 292 F.3d 781, 784 (D.C. Cir. 2002).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam