In re: Steven Prentice

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999897734-2]. Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00179-CCE-JEP. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000015720]. Mailed to: Steven Prentice. [16-1851]

Appeal: 16-1851

Doc: 16

Filed: 02/02/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1851

In re:

STEVEN DIXON PRENTICE,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Submitted:

January 31, 2017

(1:16-cv-00179-CCE-JEP)

Decided:

February 2, 2017

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam.

Steven Dixon Prentice, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1851

Doc: 16

Filed: 02/02/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Steven Dixon Prentice petitions for a writ of mandamus,
alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on
his “Demand for Release” in connection with his 28 U.S.C. § 2241
(2012) petition.

The district court’s docket sheet reveals that

the court dismissed without prejudice Prentice’s § 2241 petition
on

May

27,

petition.
legal
before

2016.

Accordingly,

we

deny

Prentice’s

mandamus

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions
this

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
PETITION DENIED

2