Opinion
No. 20-1720
10-26-2020
In re: JAMES D. PRIDGEN, Petitioner.
James D. Pridgen, Petitioner Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-hc-02300-BO) Before WYNN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James D. Pridgen, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
James D. Pridgen petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court's docket reveals that the district court recently took significant action on Pridgen's petition. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED