In re: Nyah Sekel

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1914
In re: NYAH SEKEL,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. (1:23-cv-00706-RDA-WEF)
Submitted: October 22, 2024 Decided: October 24, 2024
Before KING and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nyah Sekel, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Nyah Sekel petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order from this court
directing the district court to grant her motion for summary judgment pending in her civil
action brought under the Fair Housing Act. We conclude that Sekel 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). Mandamus relief, further, is available only when
the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to
attain the relief [the petitioner] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (cleaned up).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp.,
503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).
The relief sought by Sekel is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we
deny the 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.
PETITION DENIED

-- 2 of 2 --