Court Opinion

ID: 9890168
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-12 17:01:16.710414+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.318300
License: Public Domain

HLD-005                                                                           NOT PRECEDENTIAL

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
                                        ___________

                                                  No. 23-1080
                                                  ___________

                                      IN RE: FELIX CRUZ,
                                                      Petitioner
                             ____________________________________

                            On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
                          District Court for the District of the Virgin Islands
                          (Related to D.V.I. Crim. No. 1:04-cr-00105-004)
                            ____________________________________

                  Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
                                February 2, 2023
      Before: CHAGARES, Chief Judge, HARDIMAN, and PHIPPS, Circuit Judges

                                     (Opinion filed: October 11, 2023)
                                                _________

                                                   OPINION *
                                                   _________

PER CURIAM

         On January 4, 2023, Petitioner Felix Cruz filed a pro se petition for a writ of

mandamus asking this Court to order the District Court to act on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence, and other pending motions. By order

entered March 8, 2023, a Magistrate Judge ruled on Cruz’s miscellaneous motions, and

on July 18, 2023, the District Court granted in part and denied in part his § 2255 motion.

*
 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding
precedent.
       In light of these actions, Cruz’s 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 . . . prevent a court from being able to grant the requested relief, the case

must be dismissed as moot.”).

                                              2