Court Opinion

ID: 9393560
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-10 17:00:53.741115+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:53.966674
License: Public Domain

HLD-008                                                                           NOT PRECEDENTIAL

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
                                        ___________

                                                  No. 22-3410
                                                  ___________

                                     IN RE: JOSE ESTRADA,
                                                      Petitioner
                             ____________________________________

                         On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
              United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
                      (Related to E.D. Pa. Crim. No. 2-12-cr-00581-001)
                         ____________________________________

                      Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
                                     March 9, 2023
       Before: Chief Judge CHAGARES, HARDIMAN, and PHIPPS, Circuit Judges

                                       (Opinion filed May 10, 2023)
                                               _________

                                                    OPINION*
                                                    _________
PER CURIAM

         Jose Estrada, proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus

compelling the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to

adjudicate his motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).

While this petition was pending before us, the District Court denied Estrada’s motion. In

light of the District Court’s action, Estrada’s mandamus petition no longer presents a live

*
 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding
precedent.
controversy. Accordingly, we will dismiss the petition 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 plaintiff’s 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.”).

                                              2