ALD-026 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________

No. 21-2789 ___________

IN RE: CARLO AMATO, Petitioner ____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to D.N.J. Civ. No. 3-19-cv-19449) District Judge: Honorable Michael A. Shipp ____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. November 10, 2021 Before: JORDAN, RESTREPO, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: December 14, 2021) __________

OPINION* __________ PER CURIAM

Carlo Amato petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the District Court to rule

on his motion to vacate, correct, or set aside his sentence under

. After

Amato filed this petition, the District Court denied the motion by order entered

November 30, 2021. Thus, because Amato has received all the relief he requested, his

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. petition is moot and we will dismiss it on that basis. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum

Corp.,

(3d Cir. 1996). Amato’s motion for a refund of his filing fees

is denied. See Porter v. Dep’t of Treasury,

, 179 (3d Cir. 2009) (“It is of no

consequence whether an appeal is voluntarily dismissed, dismissed due to a jurisdictional

defect, or dismissed on the merits—appellants are not entitled to the return of their filing

and docketing fees.”).

2