NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________

No. 23-3055 ___________

IN RE: CALEB L. MCGILLVARY, Petitioner ____________________________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to D.C. No. 1-22-cv-04185) ____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. on December 7, 2023

Before: BIBAS, MATEY, and CHUNG, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: December 20, 2023) ____________________________________ ___________

OPINION* ___________

PER CURIAM

On June 22, 2022, Caleb L. McGillvary filed a petition with the District Court for a

writ of habeas corpus under

. On November 20, 2023, McGillvary

filed the instant petition for a writ of mandamus in which he asks this Court to order

the District Court to file, and then rule on, his motion to withdraw his in forma pau-

peris (“IFP”) application. He states that he submitted this motion to the District Court

on May 23, 2023. A motion to withdraw an IFP application does not appear on the

docket, but the issue has been resolved through the payment of the filing fee.

We note that we already addressed this issue when we ruled on two other mandamus

petitions filed by McGillvary. See In re: Caleb L. McGillvary, Nos. 23-2660 & 23-2820,

, at *1 (3d Cir. Nov. 28, 2023). As we explained there, McGillvary ’s

complaint regarding his motion to withdraw his IFP application is better directed to the

District Court. See generally Madden v. Myers,

(3d Cir. 1996). We are

confident that the District Court, upon receiving notice of the issue, will address it in due

course. We reach the same conclusion here.

Accordingly, we will deny McGillvary’s petition for a writ of mandamus.

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 2