Idowu Raji v.

Opinion

BLD-123 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 26-1509

___________

IN RE: IDOWU RAJI,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Related to M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 3:25-cv-02208)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

April 30, 2026

Before: KRAUSE, MATEY, and BOVE, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed June 24, 2026)

_________

OPINION*

_________

PER CURIAM

Idowu Raji filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus asking us to direct the

District Court to rule on his habeas corpus petition. After Raji filed the mandamus

petition, the District Court entered an order dismissing the habeas corpus petition. In light

of the District Court’s order dismissing Raji’s habeas corpus petition, this mandamus

*

This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.

petition no longer presents a live controversy. Therefore, we will dismiss it 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.”).