In re: Arthur v.
In re: Arthur v.
60 F. App'x 469
In re: Arthur v.
Opinion
Donald William Arthur petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court denied Arthur’s motion on February 6, 2003. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Arthur’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.