WILLIAMS v. NESTRICK (2021)

Gerard Darvell Williams, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice. We dismiss Williams’ appeal as moot. “[A] case is moot when the issues presented are no longer ‘live’ or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” United States v. Hardy, 545 F.3d 280, 283 (4th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks omitted). “[I]f an event occurs while a case is pending on appeal that makes it impossible for the court to grant any effectual relief whatever to a prevailing party, the appeal must be dismissed․” Incumaa v. Ozmint, 507 F.3d 281, 286 (4th Cir. 2007) (internal quotation marks omitted).

During the pendency of this appeal, Williams filed an amended complaint and consented to the collection of fees, as previously directed by the district court. In light of these filings, the district court vacated its dismissal order and reopened the action. Because there is no relief we can grant Williams on appeal, we dismiss the appeal as moot. 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.

DISMISSED

PER CURIAM:

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.