Case ID: f-appx_82/html/0797-01.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: Kelvin Andre SPOTTS, Petitioner.
    No. 03-7484.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 6, 2003.
    Decided Nov. 20, 2003.
    Kelvin Andre Spotts, pro se.
    Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Kelvin Andre Spotts petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 42 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court has denied the § 2255 motion and dismissed the action after conducting a de novo review. See United States v. Spotts, No. CA-00-647-3 (S.D.W.Va. Sept. 30, 2003). Because the district court has recently decided Spotts’ case and addressed the motions pending at the time of decision, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. Spotts has filed a premature petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc. Because an opinion had not issued prior to the filing of the petition, we deny the petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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