in Re: Stephen Mitchell v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 1976 citations omitted . Only “exceptional…

1
HLD-114 (July 2009) NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
NO. 09-2905
________________
IN RE: STEPHEN MITCHELL,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(Related to M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 3:08-cv-00787; M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 3:08-cv-01588; and
M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 3:09-cv-00789)
_____________________________________
Submitted Under Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
July 31, 2009
Before: SCIRICA, Chief Judge, WEIS and GARTH, Circuit Judges
(filed: August 13, 2009)
_______________
OPINION
________________
PER CURIAM.
Stephen Mitchell is a Pennsylvania inmate who has filed three separate suits
in federal district court alleging violations of his civil rights related to various prison
practices and occurrences in the course of his incarceration. All three suits are still
pending. Mitchell has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1651, apparently seeking to obtain faster adjudication of his suits by the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Mandamus is a “drastic remedy” which is generally used only to “confine
an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to
exercise its authority when it is its duty to do so.” Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394,
402 (1976) (citations omitted). Only “exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial
‘usurpation of power’” warrant the use of this extraordinary remedy. Id. (citation
omitted). Relief is not warranted here.
Mitchell’s three actions were filed in April 2008, August 2008, and April
2009, respectively. Review of the District Court’s docket for each case reveals no delay
that would constitute an exceptional circumstance. Accordingly, we will deny the
petition. We also deny Mitchell’s motion for appointment of counsel and his “Motion for
Order of Protection.”
2

-- 2 of 2 --