Case ID: f-appx_459/html/0078-01.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: Anthony LIONETTI, Petitioner.
    No. 11-3880.
    United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R.App. P. Nov. 3, 2011.
    Opinion filed: Jan. 27, 2012.
    Anthony Lionetti, Minersville, PA, pro se.
    Katie Bagley, Esq., Shawn Noud, Esq., United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, James P. Lynch, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Camden, NJ, for Defendant-Respondent.
    Before: Chief Judge MCKEE, ALDISERT and GARTH, Circuit Judges.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On October 26, 2011, Anthony Lionetti filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the District Court to act on his motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On November 18, 2011, the District Court denied Lionetti’s § 2255 motion. Thus, his request for an order directing the District Court to act on his motion is now moot.

Lionetti also requests the recusal of the District Court Judge. While mandamus is available to review a District Court’s refusal to recuse pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), see Alexander v. Primerica Holdings, Inc., 10 F.3d 155, 163 (3d Cir.1993), Lionetti did not move for recusal in the District Court. Thus, he is not entitled to mandamus relief on that ground.

For the above reasons, the mandamus petition will be denied. 
      
      . Section 455(a) provides that a judge “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”