Carlo Amato v., No. 21-2789 (3d Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

ALD-026 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 21-2789 ___________ IN RE: CARLO AMATO, Petitioner ____________________________________ On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. 3-19-cv-19449) District Judge: Honorable Michael A. Shipp ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. November 10, 2021 Before: JORDAN, RESTREPO, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: December 14, 2021) __________ OPINION* __________ PER CURIAM Carlo Amato petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the District Court to rule on his motion to vacate, correct, or set aside his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. After Amato filed this petition, the District Court denied the motion by order entered November 30, 2021. Thus, because Amato has received all the relief he requested, his * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. petition is moot and we will dismiss it on that basis. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996). Amato’s motion for a refund of his filing fees is denied. See Porter v. Dep’t of Treasury, 564 F.3d 176, 179 (3d Cir. 2009) (“It is of no consequence whether an appeal is voluntarily dismissed, dismissed due to a jurisdictional defect, or dismissed on the merits—appellants are not entitled to the return of their filing and docketing fees.”). 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.