James Sporish v.

AMENDED HLD-007 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
____________

No. 15-1575
____________

IN RE: JAMES DANIEL SPORISH,
Petitioner
__________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from
the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(Related to D.C. Civ. No. 12-cv-04142)
__________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Fed. R. App. Pro. 21
April 23, 2015

Before: MCKEE, Chief Judge, GARTH and BARRY, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: July 15, 2015)
____________

OPINION*
____________

PER CURIAM

Petitioner James Sporish, a Pennsylvania state prisoner, filed a petition for a writ

of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on July 19, 2012. The case was referred

to a Magistrate Judge. The District Attorney’s Office of Delaware County filed a

response on September 13, 2012. In early 2013, Sporish amended his petition, and filed

*
This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.
several motions, including a motion for discovery. The state promptly responded to these

filings. In October 2013, the case was marked closed and placed in civil suspense

pending a report from the Magistrate Judge.

On March 10, 2015, Sporish filed a petition for a writ of mandamus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1651 with this Court, alleging extraordinary delay in the adjudication of his

petition below. Subsequently, on May 7, 2015, the Magistrate Judge denied all of

Sporish’s outstanding motions and entered a Report & Recommendation recommending

that Sporish’s habeas petition be denied with prejudice. Accordingly, because Sporish

has obtained the relief he requested, the mandamus petition will be dismissed as moot.

See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996).

2