Case Name: IN RE: Shaun ROSIERE, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-06-02
Citations: 690 F. App'x 93
Docket Number: No. 17-1092
Parties: IN RE: Shaun ROSIERE, Petitioner
Judges: Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, MCKEE and FUENTES, Circuit Judges
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 690
Pages: 93–93

Head Matter:
IN RE: Shaun ROSIERE, Petitioner
No. 17-1092
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. March 2, 2017
(Opinion filed: June 2, 2017)
Shaun Rosiere, Pro Se
Mark E. Coyne, Esq., Leah A. Farrell, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Newark, NJ, John J. Hoffman, Esq., Office of Attorney General of New Jersey, Division of Law Employment Litigation Section, Trenton, NJ, Matthew T. Smith, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Camden, NJ, for Defendant-Respondent
Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, MCKEE and FUENTES, Circuit Judges

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM
Shaun Rosiere seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the District Court to rule on three motions pending in the underlying criminal matter concerning the terms of his supervised release. By order entered April 5, 2017, the District Court denied each motion. In light of the District Court's action, this mandamus petition no longer presents a live controversy. Therefore, we will dismiss it as moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996) ("If developments occur during the course of adjudication that eliminate a plaintiffs personal stake in the outcome of a suit or prevent a court from being able to grant the requested relief, the case must be dismissed as moot.").
This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.