
    In re: Shahborn EMMANUEL, Petitioner.
    No. 05-6915.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 27, 2005.
    Decided Oct. 3, 2005.
    Shahborn Emmanuel, Petitioner pro se.
    Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Shahborn Emmanuel seeks a writ of mandamus remanding his ease to the district court for resentencing in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976). Mandamus relief is available only when there are no other means by which the relief sought could be granted, In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987), and may not be used as a substitute for appeal. The party seeking mandamus relief bears the heavy burden of showing that he has no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires and that his entitlement to such relief is clear and indisputable. Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980). Emmanuel fails to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny Emmanuel’s petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED  