Case Name: In re: Lamar CALDWELL, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-07-19
Citations: 229 F. App'x 194
Docket Number: No. 07-2682
Parties: In re: Lamar CALDWELL, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 229
Pages: 194–195

Head Matter:
In re: Lamar CALDWELL, Petitioner.
No. 07-2682.
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Under Rule 21, Fed. R.App. P. June 27, 2007.
Filed: July 19, 2007.
Lamar Caldwell, Fairton, NJ, pro se.
Before: BARRY, AMBRO and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Pro se petitioner Lamar Caldwell (a/k/a Mark Benton) filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court on June 8, 2007. Although not entirely clear, it appears that Caldwell would like this Court to order District Judge Stewart Dalzell and Magistrate Judge M. Faith Angelí of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, who presided over his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus, to assume jurisdiction over Case No. 05-04972, which Caldwell filed in the District of New Jersey, and which is closed. As we have no legal authority to issue such an order, Caldwell has no right, much less a "clear and indisputable" right, to issuance of the writ. Madden v. Myers, 102 F.3d 74, 79 (3d Cir.1996). Accordingly, we will deny the petition.
Additionally, upon review of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania's docket for Case No. 98-05102, it appears that Caldwell did not receive a copy of the District Court's August 21, 2006 order denying his request to reopen the case. Thus, to the extent that Caldwell seeks to compel the District Court to rule on the request to reopen, we will deny the petition for writ of mandamus as moot because the District Court did, in fact, rule on the request.
Finally, to the extent that Caldwell seeks to appeal from a decision in District of New Jersey Case No. 05-4972, we note that he has already appealed from the District Court's orders in that case, and that we dismissed his appeal on April 19, 2007, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).