Third Circuit disposition — 261358np-pdf

ALD-123 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 26-1358
___________
IN RE: TIMOTHY BAUKMAN,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(Related to E.D. Pa. Crim. No. 2:05-cr-00440-008)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
April 30, 2026
Before: SHWARTZ, FREEMAN, and CHUNG, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: May 6, 2026)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
* 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
Timothy Baukman filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus asking us to
direct the District Court to rule on his motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 36 to correct his presentence investigation report. Ct. App. Dkt. No. 1. After
Baukman filed the mandamus petition, the District Court entered an order denying the
Rule 36 motion. In light of the District Court’s order denying Baukman’s Rule 36
motion, this mandamus petition no longer presents a live controversy. Therefore, we will
dismiss it as moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698–99 (3d
Cir. 1996).

-- 2 of 2 --