
    In re Hieda A. KEELER, Petitioner.
    No. 15-1605.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 20, 2015.
    Decided: Aug. 24, 2015.
    Hieda-A. Keeler, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
   Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Hieda Keeler petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking orders directing the district court judge and magistrate judge to recuse themselves from Keeler’s civil cases, vacating the district court’s previous orders denying her motions to recuse, and vacating the district court’s orders denying her motions for cessation of torture. We conclude that Keeler is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should 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); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir.2003). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir.2007).

We conclude that the Keeler has not made the requisite showing entitling her to relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus and deny Keeler’s motion to enter new evidence as moot. 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.  