Dee Farmer v.
Dee Farmer v.
Opinion
DLD-087 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________
No. 18-3345 ___________
IN RE: DEE DEIDRE FARMER, Petitioner ____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to Civ. No. 16-cv-06141) ____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. January 31, 2019
Before: JORDAN, GREENAWAY, JR., and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: February 12, 2019) _________
OPINION * _________
PER CURIAM
On October 22, 2018, Dee Deirdre Farmer filed a petition for writ of mandamus to
compel the District Court to adjudicate her September 14, 2017 motions to proceed in
forma pauperis and to reopen proceedings in her civil rights action. But by order entered
April 30, 2018, the District Court had already decided Farmer’s motions, so we must in
* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. turn dismiss her mandamus petition 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.”).
If Farmer wishes to reopen her case in the District Court, she should file a motion
to reopen that complies with the instructions in the District Court’s order entered on April
30, 2018, with an explanation why her motion is being filed past the deadline set by that
court. The Clerk of this Court is directed to send Farmer a copy of the April 30, 2018
order along with this opinion.1
1 Farmer’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished