Case ID: f-appx_461/html/0097-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re: Brenneis A. NESBITT, Petitioner.
    No. 12-1159.
    United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R.App. P. Feb. 2, 2012.
    Opinion filed Feb. 8, 2012.
    Brenneis Alister Nesbitt, Fairton, NJ, pro se.
    Kim L. Chisholm, Esq., Office Of United States Attorney, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, VI, for United States of America.
    U.S. Atty. St., Office of United States Attorney, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, VI, for Raymond L. Finch.
    Before: AMBRO, JORDAN and VANASKIE, Circuit Judges.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On January 24, 2012, Brenneis Alister Nesbitt filed a petition for writ of mandamus requesting that we direct the District Court to rule on a motion that he had filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On that same day, the District Court ruled on Nes-bitt’s § 2255 motion. In light of the District Court’s action, the question Nesbitt presented is no longer a live controversy, so we will deny the petition as moot. See, e.g., Lusardi v. Xerox Corp., 975 F.2d 964, 974 (3d Cir.1992).