July 10, 2013
RONALD GRAHAM, Petitioner,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, et al, Respondents.
This matter is before the Court on the petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. The Court will grant the application and dismiss the petition.
Petitioner alleges that "administrative agents [of] the New York City Housing Authority wrongfully ... refused to act and process [his] application, " Pet.
¶4, for "the senior housing to which [he is] entitled as a senior citizen, id.
¶ 2. He demands a writ of mandamus compelling the respondents "to give [him] a
senior apartment." Id. ¶5.
Mandamus relief is proper only if
'(1) the plaintiff has a clear right to relief; (2) the defendant has a clear duty to act; and (3) there is no other adequate remedy available to plaintiff Council of and for the Blind of Delaware County Valley v. Regan, 709 F.2d 1521, 1533 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (en banc). The party seeking mandamus has the "burden of showing that [his] right to issuance of the writ is 'clear and indisputable." Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289 (1988) (citing Bankers Life & Cas. Co. v. Holland, 346 U.S. 379, 384 (1953)). This petitioner addresses none of these elements, and thus fails to meet his burden.
The petition for a writ of mandamus will be denied. An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.