In Re: Pargev Gazdhyan, Jr v., No. 18-3657 (3d Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DLD-182 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 18-3657 ___________ IN RE: PARGEV GAZDHYAN, JR., Petitioner ____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2:17-cv-00218) ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. May 9, 2019 Before: JORDAN, GREENAWAY, Jr., and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed August 20, 2019) _________ OPINION* _________ PER CURIAM Pro se petitioner Pargev Gazdhyan seeks a writ of mandamus in connection with a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion he filed in the District Court. For the reasons that follow, we will dismiss Gazdhyan’s mandamus petition as moot. * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 1 In April 2018, Gazdhyan filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under § 2255 in the District Court. On December 11, 2018, Gazdhyan filed this mandamus petition, asking that we direct the District Court to rule on his § 2255 motion “in an expedited fashion.” Mandamus Petition, at 1. Just over one month later, on January 23, 2019, the District Court issued a memorandum and order, denying Gazdhyan’s § 2255 motion. Because Gazdhyan has now obtained the relief he sought, an adjudication of his § 2255 motion, his mandamus petition is now moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698–99 (3d Cir. 1996). We will therefore dismiss the petition. 2
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.
