Federal Circuit disposition — 26-137

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
In Re CARL EDWARD JOHNSON,
Petitioner
______________________
2026-137
______________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in Nos. 25-9113 and
26-1524.
______________________
ON PETITION AND MOTION
______________________
Before TARANTO , H UGHES , and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
PER C URIAM.
O R D E R
Carl Edward Johnson files a petition for a writ of man-
damus and “motion for order to show cause” regarding
pending claims for benefits from the Department of Veter-
ans Affairs.1 ECF No. 2 at 4. Among other things, he
1 Mr. Johnson is presently briefing an appeal (No.
2025-9113) at the United States Court of Appeals for Vet-
erans Claims concerning a December 2025 rating decision.
His related mandamus petition (No. 2026-1524) at the
Case: 26-137 Document: 10 Page: 1 Filed: 06/10/2026

-- 1 of 3 --

IN RE JOHNSON 2
asserts improper withholding of agency records, improper
splitting of his claims into “fragmented ‘docketed s[h]eets’,”
and allowing the filing of an unauthorized brief. Id. He
seeks, inter alia, to compel the consolidation of the record,
correct his dockets, and immediately execute a remand or-
der.
A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and
may only issue if petitioner has shown a “clear and indis-
putable” right to relief and that there are “no other ade-
quate means” to attain the relief desired—“a condition
designed to ensure that the writ will not be used as a sub-
stitute for the regular appeals process.” Love v.
McDonough, 100 F.4th 1388, 1393 (Fed. Cir. 2024) (quoting
Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81
(2004)). Mr. Johnson has not met this demanding standard
at least because he has not shown that mandamus is the
only adequate means to obtain relief. He can seek relief at
the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
and from this court by regular appeal, if warranted, after
the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims issues a decision.
And, to the extent Mr. Johnson has sought such relief, he
has not shown that any delay in handling his cases has
been so egregious as to warrant mandamus relief.
Accordingly,
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims was recently denied
after the filing of this mandamus petition.
Case: 26-137 Document: 10 Page: 2 Filed: 06/10/2026

-- 2 of 3 --

IN RE JOHNSON 3
IT IS O RDERED THAT:
(1) The petition is denied.
(2) All pending motions are denied.
June 10, 2026
Date
FOR THE C OURT
Case: 26-137 Document: 10 Page: 3 Filed: 06/10/2026

-- 3 of 3 --