Third Circuit disposition — 241610np-pdf

CLD-110 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 24-1610
___________
IN RE: MICHAEL RINALDI,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(Related to Civ. No. 3:21-cv-00225)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
April 18, 2024
Before: KRAUSE, FREEMAN, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: May 20, 2024)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
Michael Rinaldi filed a petition for writ of mandamus requesting that we direct the
District Court to rule on a “Motion to Dismiss” (ECF 8) and a “Verified Claim” (ECF 9)
that he filed in a civil action in which the Government seeks forfeiture of $18,010 in
currency. On the same day that Rinaldi signed the mandamus petition, the District Court
* 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
denied his “Motion to Dismiss” and ordered that his “Verified Claim” be stricken for lack
of Article III standing. (ECF 25 & 26.) In light of the District Court’s action, the
question Rinaldi presented is no longer a live controversy, so we will dismiss his
mandamus petition as moot. See Lusardi v. Xerox Corp., 975 F.2d 964, 974 (3d Cir.
1992); see also 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)).

-- 2 of 2 --