Opinions of the United 2008 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-3-2008 In Re: Alton D. Brown Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 08-2683 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008 Recommended Citation "In Re: Alton D. Brown " (2008). 2008 Decisions. Paper 412. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008/412 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2008 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu. Amended HLD-149 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 08-2683 ___________ IN RE: ALTON D. BROWN, Petitioner ____________________________________ On Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to Civ. No. 08-cv-00743) ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. August 29, 2008 Before: SCIRICA, Chief Judge, ALDISERT and GARTH, Circuit Judges (Filed: October 3, 2008) _________ OPINION OF THE COURT _________ PER CURIAM. Alton Brown, an inmate incarcerated at a Pennsylvania correctional facility, filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for relief from abuse and harassment by prison staff. He alleged that the staff members retaliated against him for filing various grievances and complaints. Brown also filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and a motion requesting a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. His motion for leave to file in forma pauperis was docketed on February 15, 2008, and his “amended” motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction was docketed on March 18, 2008. On April 10, 2008, he filed a request to the District Court asking it to rule on his motions. Brown then petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus ordering that the District Court act on his pending motions.1 The District Court has now entered an order denying with prejudice Brown’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and it ordered the Clerk to administratively terminate the action without filing Brown’s amended complaint or other documents. Because the District Court has now provided Brown the relief he sought in his mandamus petition to this Court, i.e., a ruling on his petition for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and other pending motions, we will deny his amended mandamus petition as moot. 1 The Court has the benefit of reviewing Brown’s original and amended petitions for writ of mandamus. 2