Bradley Jared Barton, Texas prisoner # 1680744, who' stands convicted of capital murder, seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the district court’s order staying and abating his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 proceeding until the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled on his second state ha-beas petition. The district court’s order also granted the respondent’s summary judgment motion in part to the extent it argued that Barton’s claims were unex-hausted. Barton argues that the district court erred in staying the case pending exhaustion and that it should have excused *230 the requirement that he exhaust his state court remedies because the state habeas process was ineffective.

Barton’s motion for a COA is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY. See Young v. Stephens, 795 F.3d 484, 494 (5th Cir. 2015), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 1453, 194 L.Ed.2d 557 (2016). Moreover, because the TCCA has now ruled on Barton’s second state habeas petition and the district court is no longer holding the case in abeyance pending exhaustion, the issue of whether the district court should have stayed the case or excused the exhaustion requirement is now moot. See United States Parole Comm’n v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388, 395-96, 100 S.Ct. 1202, 63 L.Ed.2d 479 (1980); Motient Corp. v. Dondero, 529 F.3d 532, 537 (5th Cir. 2008). The appeal is therefore DISMISSED AS MOOT.