Opinions of the United
2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
8-23-2007
In Re: Hoffman
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 07-2184
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007
Recommended Citation
"In Re: Hoffman " (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 544.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/544
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2007 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
HLD-108 (June 2007) NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
NO. 07-2184
________________
IN RE: MICHAEL KEVIN HOFFMAN,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the District of Delaware
(Related to Civ. No. 05-cv-00473)
Submitted Under Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
June 1, 2007
Before: SCIRICA, CHIEF JUDGE, WEIS and GARTH, CIRCUIT JUDGES
(Filed: August 23, 2007)
_______________________
OPINION
_______________________
PER CURIAM
Pro se petitioner Michael Kevin Hoffman seeks a writ of mandamus to
compel the United States District Court for the District of Delaware to rule upon his
petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Hoffman filed his petition for writ of habeas corpus on August 2, 2006. On
December 1, 2006, the respondents filed an answer. Hoffman then filed a reply on March
1
16, 2007. Two weeks later, Hoffman filed the present petition for writ of mandamus
seeking to compel the District Court to rule upon his petition.
On June 14, 2007, the District Court entered an order dismissing without
prejudice Hoffman’s habeas petition. Because Hoffman has now received the relief he
sought in filing his mandamus petition—namely, a ruling on his habeas corpus
petition—we will deny his mandamus petition as moot.
2