Joseph W. Farmer v. MARK A. KIRBY On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of…

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 19-1660
__________
JOSEPH W. FARMER,
Appellant
v.
MARK A. KIRBY
____________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey
(D.C. Civil Action No. 16-cv-08657)
District Judge: Honorable Renée Bumb
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
October 1, 2019
Before: MCKEE, COWEN and RENDELL, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed October 18, 2019)

-- 1 of 2 --

2
___________
O P I N I O N*
___________
PER CURIAM
Joseph W. Farmer timely appealed from an order of the United States District
Court for the District of New Jersey, which denied his habeas petition filed under 28
U.S.C. § 2241. Soon thereafter, Farmer was unconditionally released from prison. As
release from prison was the sole remedy that Farmer sought (and is the only remedy he
mentions in his appeal brief), his appeal is now moot. See Invista S.À.R.L. v. Rhodia,
S.A., 625 F.3d 75, 85-86 (3d Cir. 2010) (“[A]n appeal will be dismissed as moot when
events occur during [its] pendency . . . which prevent the appellate court from granting
any effective relief,” as appellate courts “do not have jurisdiction to hear a case that
cannot affect the rights the appellant wishes to assert”) (internal quotation marks
omitted)). We thus will dismiss the appeal.1
* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.
1 The parties were invited to address how Farmer’s release from prison affected the
appeal. Farmer did not respond within the time allowed, but in any event, we cannot
discern any way in which this appeal could effectuate any relief that Farmer requested.

-- 2 of 2 --