Case ID: f-appx_78/html/0290-01.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 Keslet ETIENNE, a/k/a Jose Phillipe, Petitioner.
    No. 03-7365.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 9, 2003.
    Decided Oct. 21, 2003.
    Keslet Etienne, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Keslet Etienne petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) motion filed in July 2002. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court dismissed Etienne’s motion without prejudice on September 5, 2003. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny Etienne’s mandamus petition as moot because the district court has recently decided Etienne’s case. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED.