In re: Dmitry Pronin, 18-2250 (2019)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 18-2250
Visitors: 4
Filed: Mar. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2250 In re: DMITRY PRONIN, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:12-cv-03416-DCN) Submitted: March 14, 2019 Decided: March 18, 2019 Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dmitry Pronin, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dmitry Pronin petitions for a writ of manda
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2250 In re: DMITRY PRONIN, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:12-cv-03416-DCN) Submitted: March 14, 2019 Decided: March 18, 2019 Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dmitry Pronin, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dmitry Pronin petitions for a writ of mandam..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2250 In re: DMITRY PRONIN, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:12-cv-03416-DCN) Submitted: March 14, 2019 Decided: March 18, 2019 Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dmitry Pronin, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dmitry Pronin petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in scheduling a trial in his suit. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petition. 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
Source: CourtListener
