Idowu Raji v.

BLD-123 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 26-1509 ___________ IN RE: IDOWU RAJI, Petitioner ____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Related to M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 3:25-cv-02208) ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. April 30, 2026 Before: KRAUSE, MATEY, and BOVE, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed June 24, 2026) _________ OPINION* _________ PER CURIAM Idowu Raji filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus asking us to direct the District Court to rule on his habeas corpus petition. After Raji filed the mandamus petition, the District Court entered an order dismissing the habeas corpus petition. In light of the District Court’s order dismissing Raji’s habeas corpus petition, this mandamus

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. petition no longer presents a live controversy. Therefore, we will dismiss it 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.”).