Filed: Oct. 03, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1624 In re: WILLIAM DOUGLAS HAMPTON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:15-cv-00464-CMH-TCB) Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 3, 2016 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 Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William Douglas Hampton petitions for a wri
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1624 In re: WILLIAM DOUGLAS HAMPTON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:15-cv-00464-CMH-TCB) Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 3, 2016 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 Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William Douglas Hampton petitions for a writ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1624 In re: WILLIAM DOUGLAS HAMPTON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:15-cv-00464-CMH-TCB) Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 3, 2016 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 Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 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
