
    Daniel Gabino MARTINEZ; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 14-17298
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted November 16, 2016 
    
    Filed November 21, 2016
    Daniel Gabino Martinez, Pro Se
    Ramona Hage Morrison, Pro Se
    Dalton Warren Wilson, Pro Se
    Gregory William Addington, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USRE—Office of the US Attorney-Reno, Reno, NV, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: LEAYY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment in their action alleging unreasonable delay in the processing of their grazing application by the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”). We dismiss.

Plaintiffs brought their complaint under the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(1), which provides the district court with authority to compel agency action when that action is unreasonably delayed. During the pendency of this case, the BLM acted on plaintiffs’ application by sending plaintiffs a letter on March 14, 2014, acknowledging receipt of their application and pointing out several deficiencies in the application. Accordingly, plaintiffs’ request to compel agency action on their application is moot, and we dismiss the appeal.

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     