- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
In re: Huss
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________ In re: JAREK HUSS,
Petitioner.
No. 25-1453
(D.C. No. 1:24-CV-01912-DDD-NRN) (D. Colo.)
_________________________________
ORDER
_________________________________ Before McHUGH, MORITZ, and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________
This matter is before the court on Jarek Huss's pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. Huss argues that the district court erroneously dismissed his case. He asks us to direct the district court "to reinstate and properly adjudicate [his] claims" and
"[g]rant any other relief deemed just and proper." Pet. at 2. Huss claims that he has no alternative method of relief because "the standard appeal process would not correct the error in a timely manner." Id.
"Mandamus is not a substitute for appeal after a final judgment and is a drastic remedy that is invoked only in extraordinary circumstances." United States v. Copar Pumice Co., 714 F.3d 1197, 1210 (10th Cir. 2013) (internal quotation marks omitted).
"The writ of mandamus issues only in exceptional circumstances to correct a clear abuse of discretion, an abdication of the judicial function, or the usurpation of judicial power."
Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).
Huss specifically asks this court to review and overturn the district court's final order dismissing his case. The appropriate avenue for the relief he seeks is an appeal, not
FILED
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit
March 2, 2026
Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court
Appellate Case: 25-1453 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 03/02/2026 Page: 1
1
2
a petition for a writ of mandamus. See id. And it appears that Huss is pursuing the appropriate relief, as he has an appeal before this court of the district court's dismissal of his complaint. Further, Huss has not demonstrated why the length of the appellate process amounts to an "exceptional circumstance" in his case, nor has he shown that he has a clear and indisputable right to the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. See id. We grant Huss's motion to proceed in forma pauperis. We deny his mandamus petition.
Entered for the Court
Per Curiam
Appellate Case: 25-1453 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 03/02/2026 Page: 2
2
Alert