History
  • No items yet
midpage
In Re: William Hampton v.
16-1624
4th Cir.
Oct 3, 2016
Check Treatment
Docket

*1 Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Douglas Hampton, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *2 PER CURIAM:

William Douglas Hampton petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has failed to comply with this court’s mandate to transfer several motions to the docket of his pending declaratory judgment action. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court has complied with the directions of our mandate. See Hampton v. Fed. Corr. Complex Petersburg, No. 1:15-cv-00318-CMH-TCB (E.D. Va. Apr. 6, 2016). Accordingly, because the district court has already taken the action Hampton requests, 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

2

Case Details

Case Name: In Re: William Hampton v.
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Oct 3, 2016
Docket Number: 16-1624
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.