In Re Barry Brooks, Jr.

CLEAR LEGAL DUTY. Whether the U.S. Court of Ap­ peals for the 11th Circuit owes a clear, indisputable, nondiscretionary, and ministerial duty to submit for judicial determination a motion filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 27(b) and 11th Circuit Rule 27-2 seeking reconsideration, vacatur, or modification of an or­ der of its own Clerk, where the delegating rule makes cler­ ical authority expressly "subject to review by the court," where no judicial officer of that court has acted upon the motion, and where no order of that court addresses it.

ABSENCE OF OTHER RELIEF. Whether a writ of mandamus issued by this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) is the only adequate remedy available to Petitioner, where a clerk’s disposition of the motion invoking judicial review yields no appealable order and no judgment from which certiorari may be sought under 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1); where no district court may compel a court of appeals to act; where that court cannot issue mandamus to itself; where rehearing is exhausted; and where 11th Circuit Rule 27-3 forbids any successive motion for reconsideration.

ABUSE OR USURPATION. Is mandamus under 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) the only adequate remedy when a clerk’s disposition creates no appealable order or certiorari-eligi­ ble judgment (§ 1254(1)), no district court can compel the court of appeals, the court can’t mandamus itself, rehear­ ing is exhausted, and 11th Cir. R. 27-3 bars successive re­ consideration?