In re: Albert F. Iaquinta

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1896
In re: ALBERT F. IAQUINTA,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:98-hc-00764-BR)
Submitted: December 16, 2021 Decided: January 4, 2022
Before RUSHING, Circuit Judge, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judges.
Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert F. Iaquinta, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Albert F. Iaquinta petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing that
his case be reassigned to a different district judge. We conclude that Iaquinta is not entitled
to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary
circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown,
LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Iaquinta’s conclusory assertions of bias are based
solely on the district judge’s adverse rulings, which is insufficient to warrant reassignment
of the district judge. See Belue v. Leventhal, 640 F.3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2011).
Accordingly, we deny Iaquinta’s petition and corrected petition for a writ of mandamus.
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.
PETITIONS DENIED

-- 2 of 2 --