In Re GALLOGLY

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
• Decided: May 12, 2022
• Docket: 22-129
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 22-129 Document: 10 Page: 1 Filed: 05/12/2022

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

In re: REBECCA GALLOGLY, Petitioner ______________________

2022-129 ______________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:20-cv-00261-MCW, Senior Judge Mary Ellen Coster Williams. ______________________

ON PETITION ______________________ PER CURIAM. ORDER On June 17, 2020, the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissed Rebecca Gallogly’s case and entered judgment. The Court of Federal Claims subsequently de- nied all post-judgment motions on May 19, 2021. On March 10, 2022, Dr. Gallogly filed this petition challenging several of the Court of Federal Claims’ rulings and request- ing various relief in connection with her claims. The remedy of mandamus is available only in “excep- tional circumstances to correct a clear abuse of discretion or usurpation of judicial power.” In re Calmar, Inc., 854 F.2d 461, 464 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (citations omitted). A party seeking a writ of mandamus bears the burden of Case: 22-129 Document: 10 Page: 2 Filed: 05/12/2022

2 IN RE: GALLOGLY

demonstrating to the court that (1) there are no adequate alternative legal channels through which she may obtain that relief; (2) the petitioner has a clear and indisputable right to relief; and (3) the grant of mandamus is appropri- ate under the circumstances. See Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004). Dr. Gallogly has not met those requirements here. “Mandamus relief is not appropriate when a petitioner fails to seek relief through the normal appeal process.” In re Fermin, 859 F. App’x 904, 905 (Fed. Cir. 2021); see also In re Pollitz, 206 U.S. 323, 331 (1907) (“[M]andamus cannot . . . be used to perform the office of an appeal . . . .”). Be- cause Dr. Gallogly failed to raise her challenges to the de- cisions of the Court of Federal Claims by way of a timely filed direct appeal, we deny her request for mandamus. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition is denied, and any pending motions are denied as moot. FOR THE COURT

May 12, 2022 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court