In re Rodgers

556 F. App'x 271
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 25, 2014
DocketNo. 13-2290
StatusPublished

This text of 556 F. App'x 271 (In re Rodgers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Rodgers, 556 F. App'x 271 (4th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Rodgers petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in processing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) civil rights action and in adjudicating his motion for injunctive relief. 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 both denied the motion for a preliminary injunction and dismissed Rodgers’ complaint. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Rodgers’ case, the mandamus petition, as amended, is moot, and we deny it on that basis. We grant Rodgers’ request for leave to file an out-of-time supplement to his mandamus petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
556 F. App'x 271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rodgers-ca4-2014.