Summary
concluding that case was moot because a proposed mass transit line that was the subject of the suit was cancelled by the Governor after the District Court issued its opinion
Summary of this case from De La Fuente v. LamoneOpinion
No. 15-1725
12-03-2015
JOHN CUTONILLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION; MARYLAND TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, Defendants - Appellees.
John Cutonilli, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Harris Oakley, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Linda DeVuono, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. (1:13-cv-02373-ELH) Before KING, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Cutonilli, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Harris Oakley, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Linda DeVuono, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
John Cutonilli appeals the district court's order granting the Federal Transit Administration's and the Maryland Transit Administration's summary judgment motions on Cutonilli's claims seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as its order denying Cutonilli's Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. It is undisputed that the Red Line Project, which was a proposed east-west mass transit line and the subject of Cutonilli's claims, has been cancelled. We thus find that the appeal has been rendered moot. See Chafin v. Chafin, 133 S. Ct. 1017, 1023 (2013) (holding that "[f]ederal courts may not decide questions that cannot affect the rights of litigants in the case before them or give opinions advising what the law would be upon a hypothetical state of facts") (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted); Knox v. Service Employees Int'l Union, Local 1000, 132 S. Ct. 2277, 2287 (2012) (recognizing that "[a] case becomes moot only when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party") (internal quotation marks omitted).
Accordingly, we vacate the district court's orders, remand the case to the district court, and instruct the district court to dismiss Cutonilli's claims. See Mellen v. Bunting, 327 F.3d 355, 364 (4th Cir. 2003) ("If a claim becomes moot after the entry of a district court's final judgment and prior to the completion of appellate review, we generally vacate the judgment and remand for dismissal."). 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.
VACATED AND REMANDED