District of New York seeking either an order of mandamus compelling the ATF to act on his application, or plenary review of his application by the district court. The defendants m s entitled to a writ of mandamus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Section 1361 provides in full: “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.” This Court has held that a writ of mandamus may not be granted pursuant to § 1361 unless there is “a plainly defined and peremptory duty on the part of the defendant to do the act in question.” Anderson v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 1, 5 (2d Cir.1989); accord City of New York v. Heckler, 742 F.2d 729, 739 (2d Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>), aff'd on other grounds sub nom. Bowen v. City
holding that to grant a writ of mandamus a court in the exercise of its discretion must be satisfied that the writ is appropriate under the circumstances holding that a writ of mandamus will not issue under  1361 unless the defendant is under a clear nondiscretionary duty to perform the act requested recognizing the writ of mandamus may issue to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the failure to carry out a ministerial task recognizing that laches is a proper ground for refusing to issue a writ of mandamus holding that plaintiffs  lack standing because the court cannot issue the requested writ of mandamus and thus cannot redress the alleged injury