In Re Claude F. Bloodgood Iii, Petitioner, 836 F.2d 545 (4th Cir. 1987)
Annotate this CaseClaude F. Bloodgood III, petitioner pro se.
Before DONALD RUSSELL, JAMES DICKSON PHILLIPS, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Petitioner Claude F. Bloodgood III has applied to this Court for a writ of mandamus directing the district court to proceed on his civil complaint pending in that court.
The district court has now dismissed without prejudice Bloodgood's civil action, for his failure to pay a partial filing fee. See Bloodgood v. Sielaff, Misc. No. 291-N (E.D. Va., Nov. 25, 1986).
The dismissal of Bloodgood's civil action in the district court effectively moots his petition to this court for a writ of mandamus. Accordingly, although leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, Bloodgood's petition for a writ of mandamus is denied as being moot and this appeal is dismissed.
DISMISSED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
