CLD-172 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 25-1672 ___________ In re: DAVID STEBBINS, Petitioner ____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Related to D. Del. Misc. No. 1:24-mc-00478, Civ. No. 1:24-cv-01173, & Civ. No. 1:24-cv-01174) ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. June 26, 2025 Before: KRAUSE, PHIPPS, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: August 5, 2025) __________ OPINION * __________ PER CURIAM David Stebbins has filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the District Court to act in the above-captioned cases. After Stebbins filed the mandamus petition, the District Court transferred Stebbins’s two civil actions to the

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

Western District of Arkansas. And the District Court closed Stebbins’s miscellaneous matter after ruling on the pending motions.

In light of the District Court’s resolution of the three cases, our Clerk of Court directed Stebbins to file a response, within 21 days, “addressing whether his mandamus petition is moot.” Stebbins failed to respond, timely or otherwise. In any event, because Stebbins’s mandamus petition no longer presents a live controversy, we will dismiss it as moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698–99 (3d Cir. 1996).