In Re: Earl v.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
VINCENT BRADFORD EARL, Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
July 13, 2007
August 1, 2007
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent Bradford Earl, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Vincent Bradford Earl petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. He seeks an order from this court Our review of the docket
directing the district court to act.
sheet reveals that the district court disposed of the matter in an order docketed on June 20, 2007. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Earl's case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. pauperis, we deny Although we grant leave to proceed in forma Earl's motion for default and request for
compensation and attorney fees.
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.
- 2 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?