Where post-judgment evidence showed that the minors had been placed in an adoptive home, adoptability challenge is moot. In her appeal from parental rights termination, mother contended that the trial court’s finding that the children were likely to be adopted was not supported by substantial evidence. The five siblings were bonded to each other, and had emotional, developmental and behavior findings which made them not generally adoptable. The Agency argued that the children were generally and specifically adoptable based on the number of families interested in adopting all five children. The trial court denied a request to proceed under section 366.26, subdivision (c)(3) and continued the case for 180 days to determine whether all five siblings could be placed together. On appeal, mother argued that the court should not consider post-judgment evidence in determining whether the court erred when it found that the children were likely to be adopted within a reasonable time. The better practice would have been to continue the hearing to allow the Agency to identify a placement for the minors. The appellate court found that the evidence did not support a finding that the children were likely to be adopted within a reasonable time. However, the post-judgment evidence showed the issue of adoptability has been rendered moot by the children’s subsequent placement in an approved adoptive home. Any procedural error was harmless.