¶1 Arthur J. Privott petitions for writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court denied Privott’s § 2255 motion on March 29, 2005. The judgment was filed on April 5, 2005, with copies mailed to his counsel. * Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Privott’s case, we grant *192 leave to proceed in forma pauperis but deny the mandamus petition as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
¶2 PETITION DENIED