in Re: Chaka Kwanzaa v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 3d Cir. 1996 “If developments occur…

BLD-106 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 26-1576
___________
IN RE: CHAKA KWANZAA,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
(Related to Civ. No. 1:24-cv-08132)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
April 2, 2026
Before: KRAUSE, MATEY, and BOVE, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: June 9, 2026)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
Chaka Kwanzaa, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus,
requesting that we direct the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
(“the District Court”) to adjudicate his dispute with the Commissioner of Social Security
* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
(“Commissioner”) over a reduction in social security benefits and to rule on various other
motions.1 Five days before Kwanzaa filed the mandamus petition, however, the District
Court granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed Kwanzaa’s
complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
In light of the District Court’s action, the question Kwanzaa presented is not a live
controversy, so we will dismiss his mandamus petition as moot.2 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.” (citation omitted)).
1 Kwanzaa later supplemented the mandamus petition with an “Emergency Petition for
Writ of Mandamus,” as well as documents in support of the petition.
2 Petitioner’s pending motions are denied without prejudice to the Court’s consideration
of the identical motions that are pending in Kwanzaa’s appeal docketed at C.A. No. 26-
1733.

-- 2 of 2 --