PER CURIAM.
Jack Dewhan Randolph filed a petition for writ of mandamus alleging undue delay in the district court’s ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The district court ruled on the motion on December 17, 2004, after Randolph filed his mandamus petition. Accordingly, the mandamus petition is now moot. Therefore, although we grant Randolph’s motion to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we deny the petition for mandamus relief. 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.
PETITION DENIED