In re Mack

Fourth Circuit

In re Mack

381 F. App'x 264

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 3, 2010·No. No. 10-1362·Published

Opinion

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Bennie A. Mack, Jr. petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his pro se motions to arrest judgment and to vacate [265]*265judgment. 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 the motions. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petition 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.

PETITION DENIED.

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

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Bennie A. Mack, Jr. petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his pro se motions to arrest judgment and to vacate [265]*265judgment. 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 the motions. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petition 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.

PETITION DENIED.

In re Mack, 381 F. App'x 264 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

381 F. App'x 264 (In re Mack) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.