In re: Michael Allen KOKOSKI, Petitioner, 190 F. App'x 244

PER CURIAM: Michael Allen Kokoski petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order for his immediate release from federal prison. We conclude Kokoski is not entitled to mandamus relief. 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). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987).

Kokoski’s request, if considered, calls upon this court to review the merits of the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979). The relief sought by Kokoski is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED In any event, a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation is not an appealable final order. Kokoski may seek to appeal a district court’s order that adopts the magistrate judge’s recommendation.