Case ID: f-appx_668/html/0435-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURÍAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

IN RE: Alton D. BROWN, Petitioner
    No. 16-1546
    United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. August 18, 2016
    (Opinion filed: September 12, 2016)
    Alton D. Brown, Pro Se.
    Attorney General Pennsylvania, Office of Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, PA, for Defendants-Respondents Shirley Moore Smeal, Daniel Burns.
    Before: KRAUSE, SCIRICA and FUENTES, Circuit Judges
   OPINION

PER CURÍAM

In March 2016, Alton Brown, a Pennsylvania prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, requesting that we order the District Court to rule on his motion for reconsideration of the order dismissing his amended complaint without prejudice and his motion to recuse in Brown v. Wetzel, E.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2:14-cv-05762. However, the District Court ruled on those motions in February 2016, before Brown submitted this petition. Apparently as a result of a prison transfer, Brown did not receive the ruling when it was entered.

Because the District Court has ruled on Brown’s motions and he has received the mandamus relief he requested, his mandamus petition is moot. See, e.g., Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996). Accordingly, we will dismiss Brown’s mandamus petition. 
      
       This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.
     
      
      . The District Court recently resent the order to Brown at his current address when it dismissed the action with prejudice.