Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Oklahoma

Hernandez v. Immigration Customs Enforcement

Western District of OklahomaDavid L. RussellDecided June 6, 2019

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency ICE Read by a model
Rather, he seeks to compel ICE to move forward with his detainer because it was lodged more than five years ago and the agency has yet to take any action thereon.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Here Mr. Hernandez requests that the Court compel the Attorney General to commence removal proceedings by acting upon the detainer filed with the State of Oklahoma.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The action is therefore subject to dismissal. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED to the extent it is consistent with this Order.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Mr. Hernandez, who is currently in state custody serving a state sentence, initiated this action by filing a Motion to Compel Agency Action (Doc. No. 1) on April 10, 2019.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The action is therefore subject to dismissal. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED to the extent it is consistent with this Order.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
The action is therefore subject to dismissal.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The action is therefore subject to dismissal.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Tenth Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.