In re Abusada

Fourth Circuit

In re Abusada

445 F. App'x 661

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 9, 2011·No. Nos. 11-1391, 11-1442·Published

Opinion

Petitions denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Victor Abusada petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his motions for return of seized property, for reconsideration of his motion to appoint counsel, and to strike the Government’s answer. 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 has denied Abusada’s motions. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petitions as moot. 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.

PETITIONS DENIED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Petitions denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Victor Abusada petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his motions for return of seized property, for reconsideration of his motion to appoint counsel, and to strike the Government’s answer. 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 has denied Abusada’s motions. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petitions as moot. 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.

PETITIONS DENIED.

In re Abusada, 445 F. App'x 661 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

445 F. App'x 661 (In re Abusada) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.