Dean C. Plaskett v. ( 2018 )

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 18-3158
___________
IN RE: DEAN C. PLASKETT,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
District Court of the Virgin Islands
(Related to D.V.I. Civ. No. 3-17-cv-00067)
District Judge: Ruth Miller
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 21
October 11, 2018
Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, AMBRO and ROTH, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: December 6, 2018)
_________
OPINION *
_________
PER CURIAM
Pro se petitioner Dean C. Plaskett seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the District
Court to rule on a petition he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. A writ of mandamus
may be warranted where a district court’s “undue delay is tantamount to a failure to
exercise jurisdiction.” See Madden v. Myers, 102 F.3d 74, 79 (3d Cir. 1996). On
*
This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.
November 6, 2018, a Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation
concerning Plaskett’s § 2241 petition, and Plaskett has since filed objections. Because
the case is now moving forward, we find no reason to grant the “drastic remedy” of
mandamus relief. See In re Diet Drugs Prods. Liab. Litig., 418 F.3d 372, 378 (3d Cir.
2005). We have full confidence that the District Court will rule on Plaskett’s petition
within a reasonable time. Accordingly, we will deny Plaskett’s mandamus petition.
2