In re: CHARLES E. SMITH v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 1992 quotation marks omitted

BLD-309 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 18-2654
___________
In re: CHARLES E. SMITH, Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(Related to Civ. No. 1-17-cv-02339)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
September 13, 2018
Before: RESTREPO, BIBAS and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: September 21, 2018)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
Pro se petitioner Charles Smith has filed a petition for writ of mandamus
requesting that we direct the United States District Court for the Middle District of
Pennsylvania to rule on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. However, on March 23, 2018—
months before Smith filed this mandamus petition—the District Court dismissed the
§ 2241 petition. Smith thus has not shown an “injury in fact” that will likely “be
* 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
redressed by a favorable decision” from this Court, Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S.
555, 560–61 (1992) (quotation marks omitted), and we will therefore dismiss his petition
for lack of jurisdiction.1
1 Smith’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis and to be relieved from filing his prison-
account statement are granted.

-- 2 of 2 --