In re: Jamaal Gittens

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-1762
In re: JAMAAL GITTENS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. (3:24-cv-00817-FDW-DCK)
Submitted: October 30, 2025 Decided: November 4, 2025
Before RUSHING and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jamaal Gittens, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jamaal Gittens petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order from this court
directing the district court to grant his “habeas corpus” petition in which he sought to
remove to the district court a state court foreclosure proceeding. We conclude that Gittens
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). Further, mandamus relief is available only when
the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to
attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal
quotation marks omitted).
The relief sought by Gittens is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly,
we deny the petition for 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 --