In re Ross

Fourth Circuit

In re Ross

108 F. App'x 786

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 3, 2004

DocketNo. 04-7147

StatusPublished

This text of 108 F. App'x 786 (In re Ross) 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 Ross, 108 F. App'x 786 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

William A. Ross petitions for writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his motions to amend the criminal judgment and for reconsideration. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. The district court has already ruled [787]*787on both motions. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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

PER CURIAM.

William A. Ross petitions for writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his motions to amend the criminal judgment and for reconsideration. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. The district court has already ruled [787]*787on both motions. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 F. App'x 786, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ross-ca4-2004.