C. Tate George v., No. 20-1011 (3d Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 20-1011 ___________ IN RE: C. TATE GEORGE, Petitioner ____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to D.N.J. Civ. No. 3-17-cv-02641) ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. June 29, 2020 Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, CHAGARES and COWEN, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed July 8, 2020) _________ OPINION* _________ PER CURIAM In January 2020, C. Tate George filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus, asking us to direct the District Court to rule on a motion to vacate sentence that he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On May 26, 2020, the District Court denied the § 2255 * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. motion. See ECF 66, 67. Because George has now obtained the relief that he seeks in his mandamus petition, we will dismiss the petition as moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996) (“If developments occur during the course of adjudication that eliminate a plaintiff’s personal stake in the outcome of a suit or prevent a court from being able to grant the requested relief, the case must be dismissed as moot.”). 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.