In re: Imani Abdus-Sabir

Filing

NOT PRECEDENTIAL PER CURIAM OPINION Coram: SMITH, HARDIMAN and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges. Total Pages: 2. DLD-276

Case: 14-2058

Document: 003111657257

Page: 1

DLD-276

Date Filed: 06/20/2014

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 14-2058
___________
IN RE: IMANI ABDUS-SABIR,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
(Related to D.C. Civil Action No. 13-cv-04773)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
June 12, 2014
Before: SMITH, HARDIMAN and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: June 20, 2014)
_________
OPINION
_________

PER CURIAM
Petitioner Imani Abdus-Sabir filed in this Court a petition for writ of mandamus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651, seeking an order that the United States District Court of
New Jersey be compelled to rule on his motions for the appointment of counsel and for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis. He then filed a similar petition in the District Court,
along with a renewed application to proceed in forma pauperis. Subsequently, by order
entered on June 9, 2014, the District Court ruled on the motion for the appointment of

Case: 14-2058

Document: 003111657257

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/20/2014

counsel and the renewed application to proceed in forma pauperis. Accordingly, we will
deny Abdus-Sabir’s mandamus petition as moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum
Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996).1

1

The District Court denied the application to proceed in forma pauperis on the ground
that a portion of the renewed application was illegible. Because the District Court’s
dismissal of Abdus-Sabir’s complaint was without prejudice, he is not precluded from
pursuing his case there by once again filing a complaint accompanied by a legible version
of the documents required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).
2