Third Circuit disposition — 242629np-pdf

DLD-182 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 24-2629
___________
In re: ROBERT MANCINI; JOY SCHWARTZ;
GREGORY STENSTROM; LEAH HOOPES,
Petitioners
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(Related to E.D. Pa. No. 2:24-cv-02425)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
September 12, 2024
Before: JORDAN, PORTER, and PHIPPS, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: October 1, 2024)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
On June 5, 2024, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, the petitioners sued Delaware County, Pennsylvania, and the Board of
Elections for Delaware County, complaining that the defendants do not properly verify
voting machines or take other actions necessary to ensure the integrity of elections. The
* 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
next month, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, to which the
petitioners filed a response on July 15, 2024.
On September 3, 2024, while the motion was still pending, the petitioners filed a
mandamus petition asserting that “[j]ustice delayed in this case will be justice denied”
and requesting that we order the District Court to rule immediately on the pending motion
to dismiss and to hold trial soon thereafter on the allegations in the complaint if the
motion to dismiss were denied. 3d Cir. Doc. No. 1-3 at 4. On September 9, 2024, the
District Court granted the motion to dismiss and dismissed the complaint without
prejudice to an amendment within 30 days.
In light of the District Court’s ruling, this mandamus petition no longer presents a
live controversy. Accordingly, we will dismiss it as moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny
Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996) (noting that “[i]f developments occur
during the course of adjudication that . . . prevent a court from being able to grant the
requested relief, the case must be dismissed as moot”).

-- 2 of 2 --