
    In re: Martell WHITAKER, Petitioner.
    No. 05-6550.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 12, 2005.
    Decided Sept. 30, 2005.
    Martell Whitaker, Petitioner Pro Se.
    
      Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Petition granted by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Martell Whitaker petitions for writ of mandamus, seeking an order directing the district court to rule on a pending 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000) motion. The district court has taken no action with respect to the motion, which Whitaker filed in July 2001.

In accordance with an order from this court, the Government responded to the petition, opposing granting relief. We find the Government’s argument unpersuasive.

We conclude that Whitaker has established a clear and indisputable right to expeditious treatment of his § 3582(c)(2) motion and that no other adequate remedy is available. Therefore, we find that he is entitled to a writ of mandamus. See Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987).

Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and grant the petition for writ of mandamus. The district court is ordered to act on case No. CR-98-1016DWS within sixty days of the date of this opinion. 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 GRANTED  