`
`NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
`
`United States Court of Appeals
`for the Federal Circuit
`______________________
`
`In re: VINODH RAGHUBIR,
`Petitioner
`______________________
`
`2020-128
`______________________
`
`On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States
`Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:20-cv-00388-EGB, Senior
`Judge Eric G. Bruggink.
`______________________
`
`ON PETITION
`______________________
`
`
`PER CURIAM.
`
`O R D E R
`Vinodh Raghubir currently has a case pending before
`
`the United States Court of Federal Claims. He now peti-
`tions for a writ of prohibition, asking this court to “prohibit
`conduct pursuant to ‘the conspiracy to predetermine the
`outcome of judicial proceedings’ throughout proceedings
`now involving the Federal Court of Claims.”
`Like a writ of mandamus, a writ of prohibition is a
`drastic remedy that is available only when a petitioner has
`a clear and indisputable right to relief and no adequate al-
`ternative legal channels through which to obtain that re-
`lief. See Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Dist. of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case: 20-128 Document: 5 Page: 2 Filed: 06/18/2020
`
`2
`
`
`
`IN RE: RAGHUBIR
`
`Columbia, 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004); In re Missouri, 664
`F.2d 178, 180 (8th Cir. 1981). Mr. Raghubir has not
`demonstrated that an appeal from an eventual final judg-
`ment of the Court of Federal Claims would be inadequate
`or that he has a clear and indisputable right to relief.
`Accordingly,
`IT IS ORDERED THAT:
`The petition is denied.
`
`
` June 18, 2020
`Date
`
`FOR THE COURT
`
`/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
`Peter R. Marksteiner
`Clerk of Court
`
`
`
`
`
` s24
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`