Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in denying petitioner's unopposed motion to vacate its published opinion after respondent's unilateral action rendered petitioner's case moot

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court has consistently recognized that when a prevailing party’s unilateral action renders a case moot before appellate review concludes, the proper course is to vacate the decision below with instructions to remand to the district court for dismissal. United States v. Munsingwear, 340 U.S. 36 (1950). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit declined to follow that course in this case. Petitioner Thomas Bowling, incarcerated for an offense he committed as a juvenile, sued the Virginia Parole Board for repeatedly denying him parole without considering the mitigating circumstances of his youth at the time of the offense. The Fourth Circuit in a published opinion held that Bowling had no Eighth Amendment or Due Process right to have the Board consider his juvenile status at the time of the offense when deciding whether to grant him parole. Four weeks after that opinion, before Bowling was able to seek review in this Court, the Board granted Bowling parole, mooting his claim. Bowling filed an unopposed motion asking the Fourth Circuit to vacate its opinion on Munsingwear grounds. The Fourth Circuit denied the motion without explanation. The question presented is whether the Fourth Circuit erred in denying petitioner’s unopposed motion to vacate its published opinion after respondent’s unilateral action rendered petitioner’s case moot less than a month after the opinion’s issuance. ‘