In Re: Oakes v., 03-6930 (2003)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 03-6930
Visitors: 17
Filed: Oct. 28, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6930 In Re: DAVID J. OAKES, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-03-227-5-BO) Submitted: October 15, 2003 Decided: October 28, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David J. Oakes, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: David J. Oakes petitions for a writ of mandam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6930 In Re: DAVID J. OAKES, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-03-227-5-BO) Submitted: October 15, 2003 Decided: October 28, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David J. Oakes, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: David J. Oakes petitions for a writ of mandamu..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6930 In Re: DAVID J. OAKES, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-03-227-5-BO) Submitted: October 15, 2003 Decided: October 28, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David J. Oakes, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: David J. Oakes petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his emergency motion for a temporary restraining order. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court entered an order denying Oakes’ emergency motion for a temporary restraining order. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Oakes’ 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 2
Source: CourtListener
