In re: Moorthy Ram

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999155715-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999139893-2] Originating case number: 3:09-cr-00020-HEH-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999202236]. Mailed to: Ram. [13-1819]

Download PDF
Appeal: 13-1819 Doc: 10 Filed: 09/26/2013 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1819 In re: MOORTHY SRINIVASAN RAM, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:09-cr-00020-HEH-1) Submitted: September 24, 2013 Before NIEMEYER and Senior Circuit Judge. THACKER, Decided: Circuit September 26, 2013 Judges, and HAMILTON, Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Moorthy Srinivasan Ram, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 13-1819 Doc: 10 Filed: 09/26/2013 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Moorthy Srinivasan Ram petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court denied Ram’s motion on August 29, 2013. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Ram’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. in forma pauperis. facts and materials legal before We grant leave to proceed We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 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?