in Re: David H. Pinckney v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 3d Cir. 1996 noting that “[i]f…

HLD-019 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 25-2440
___________
IN RE: DAVID H. PINCKNEY,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
(Related to D.N.J. Civ. Nos. 3:23-cv-22563, 3:23-cv-22645, 3:23-cv-22646)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
August 28, 2025
Before: CHAGARES, Chief Judge, HARDIMAN and PORTER, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed December 4, 2025)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
Pro se petitioner David Henry Pinckney has filed a petition for a writ of
mandamus. For the reasons below, we will dismiss the petition as moot.
In November 2023, Pinckney filed three separate complaints in the District of
New Jersey (Civ. No. 3:23-cv-22563, Civ. No. 3:23-cv-22645, and Civ. No. 3:23-cv-
* 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
22646) raising fraud, trespass, and kidnapping claims stemming from his arrest for
nonpayment of child support. Along with the complaints, Pinckney submitted
applications to proceed in forma pauperis. On July 30, 2025, Pinckney filed a petition for
writ of mandamus requesting that we direct the District Court to rule on his applications
to proceed in forma pauperis.
On September 12, 2025, in all three matters, the District Court granted Pinckney’s
application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his complaint. As the
applications at issue have been decided by the District Court, Pinckney’s request is now
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.”).
Accordingly, we will dismiss the petition for a writ of mandamus as moot.

-- 2 of 2 --