This document is an unpublished court decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by William Nardone, a federal prisoner. Nardone filed the petition on the grounds that the district court had unduly delayed action on some motions in his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 action. The Fourth Circuit denies the mandamus petition as moot because the district court has now dismissed the underlying Sec. 2255 action on the merits.
This document is an unpublished court decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by William Nardone, a federal prisoner. Nardone filed the petition on the grounds that the district court had unduly delayed action on some motions in his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 action. The Fourth Circuit denies the mandamus petition as moot because the district court has now dismissed the underlying Sec. 2255 action on the merits.
This document is an unpublished court decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by William Nardone, a federal prisoner. Nardone filed the petition on the grounds that the district court had unduly delayed action on some motions in his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 action. The Fourth Circuit denies the mandamus petition as moot because the district court has now dismissed the underlying Sec. 2255 action on the merits.
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of
unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. In re William NARDONE, Petitioner. No. 88-8016.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 7, 1989. Decided Oct. 11, 1989.
William Nardone, appellant pro se.
Before DONALD RUSSELL, WIDENER, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:
William Nardone, a federal prisoner, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus on
the ground that the district court had unduly delayed action on some motions filed in his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 action. As the district court has dismissed the action on the merits, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.
PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION (PRC), CHAIRMAN HERMOGENES P. POBRE, ET AL. vs. ARLENE V. DE GUZMAN, VIOLETA V. MENESES, ET AL. G.R. No. 144681. June 21, 2004.