In re: Miller-El v.

PER CURIAM. Gary Lewis Miller-El has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. 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). “[CJourts are extremely reluctant to grant a writ of mandamus.” In re Ford Motor Co., 751 F.2d 274, 275 (8th Cir.1984). In seeking mandamus relief, Miller-El carries the heavy burden of showing that he has no other adequate means to attain the relief sought and that his right to such relief is clear and indisputable. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). We find that Miller-El has failed to meet this burden inasmuch as the pleadings he has filed in this Court do not establish extraordinary circumstances justifying a writ of mandamus. Therefore, although we grant Miller-El’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris, we deny the petition. 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.