Chaka Kwanzaa v.

BLD-106 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 26-1576 ___________ IN RE: CHAKA KWANZAA, Petitioner ____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to Civ. No. 1:24-cv-08132) ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. April 2, 2026 Before: KRAUSE, MATEY, and BOVE, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: June 9, 2026) _________ OPINION* _________ PER CURIAM Chaka Kwanzaa, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, requesting that we direct the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (“the District Court”) to adjudicate his dispute with the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) over a reduction in social security benefits and to rule on various other motions.1 Five days before Kwanzaa filed the mandamus petition, however, the District Court granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed Kwanzaa’s complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

In light of the District Court’s action, the question Kwanzaa presented is not a live controversy, so we will dismiss his mandamus petition as moot.2 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.” (citation omitted)).