Court Opinion

ID: 9947152
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-02 21:00:52.191895+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:49.104264
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7199      Doc: 13         Filed: 03/01/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-7199

        MARK A. RICH,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        UNKNOWN,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:23-cv-00385-MHL-MRC)

        Submitted: February 27, 2024                                      Decided: March 1, 2024

        Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Mark A. Rich, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7199        Doc: 13       Filed: 03/01/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Mark A. Rich seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice

        his civil complaint for failure to prosecute. On October 27, 2023, the district court granted

        Rich’s motion for reconsideration, vacated the dismissal order, and reopened the case. See

        Rich v. Unknown, No. 3:23-cv-00385-MHL-MRC (E.D. Va. Oct. 27, 2023). Rich’s appeal

        of that dismissal order is therefore moot. See Williams v. Ozmint, 716 F.3d 801, 809 (4th

        Cir. 2013) (“A case becomes moot when the issues presented are no longer live or the

        parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” (internal quotation marks

        omitted)); see also Fort Knox Music Inc. v. Baptiste, 257 F.3d 108, 110 (2d Cir. 2001)

        (explaining that because “[a] vacated judgment has no effect,” an appeal from a vacated

        judgment is moot).

               We therefore dismiss the appeal as moot. We dispense with oral argument because

        the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court

        and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

                                                     2