Case Name: In re George P. JOHNSON, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-07-23
Citations: 471 F. App'x 90
Docket Number: No. 11-3055
Parties: In re George P. JOHNSON, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 471
Pages: 90–91

Head Matter:
In re George P. JOHNSON, Petitioner.
No. 11-3055.
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R.App. P. Aug. 25, 2011.
Opinion filed: July 23, 2012.
George P. Johnson, Smyrna, DE, pro se.
Paul R. Wallace, Esq., Danielle J. Brennan, Esq., Office of Attorney General, Wilmington, DE, for State of Delaware.
Before: McKEE, Chief Judge, ALDISERT and WEIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
George P. Johnson filed a petition for writ of mandamus requesting that we direct the District Court to rule on a petition that he had filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The District Court has since ruled on Johnson's § 2254 petition. In light of the District Court's action, the question Johnson presented is no longer a live controversy, so we will deny his mandamus petition as moot. See, e.g., Lusardi v. Xerox Corp., 975 F.2d 964, 974 (3d Cir. 1992).