Background
James Robert Serena, proceeding pro se, petitioned the Fourth Circuit for a writ of mandamus in connection with litigation pending in the Eastern District of Virginia. He alleged that the district court had unduly delayed ruling on his motion for entry of default judgment against the Circuit Court of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia.
Serena asked the Fourth Circuit to direct the district court both to act on the pending motion and to enter default judgment against the Virginia court. He also moved to expedite the appellate court’s decision.
The Court’s Holding
In an unpublished per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit denied the mandamus petition. The court concluded that the record did not reveal undue delay by the district court and therefore did not entitle Serena to mandamus relief.
The court also denied Serena’s motion to expedite as moot. It resolved the matter without oral argument because the submitted materials adequately presented the facts and legal contentions and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Key Takeaways
- A request for mandamus based on judicial delay requires a record showing that the delay is undue.
- The Fourth Circuit found no undue delay and declined to order the district court to rule or enter default judgment.
- The unpublished opinion is not binding precedent in the Fourth Circuit.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the limited role of mandamus in addressing allegedly delayed district-court rulings. A pending motion, without a record establishing undue delay, will not by itself justify appellate intervention or an order directing a particular outcome.