Case Name: In re: Arthur W. PRIVOTT, a/k/a Big Bud, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-11-16
Citations: 112 F. App'x 925
Docket Number: No. 04-7000
Parties: In re: Arthur W. PRIVOTT, a/k/a Big Bud, Petitioner.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 112
Pages: 925–926

Head Matter:
In re: Arthur W. PRIVOTT, a/k/a Big Bud, Petitioner.
No. 04-7000.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 15, 2004.
Decided Nov. 16, 2004.
Arthur W. Privott, Petitioner pro se.
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Arthur W. Privott petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on our March 29, 2002 judgment that vacated and remanded its dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. Privott seeks an order from this Court directing the district court to act. Although we find that mandamus relief is not warranted because the district court has recently taken significant action in this case, we deny the mandamus petition without prejudice. 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