Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Florida

Gordon v. Ripa

Southern District of FloridaBeth BloomDecided October 18, 2021No. 1:21-cv-22177

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 Not recorded Read by a model
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiff requests that the Court declare the Government’s actions to be unlawful, and direct the Government to refer Plaintiff for a RFI.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, the Motion, ECF No. [11], is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Rule 12(b)(1) provides the proper framework for evaluating a motion to dismiss on grounds of mootness.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants Garrett Ripa, Corey A. Price, Tae Johnson, and Alejandro Mayorkas’ (collectively, the “Government”) Motion to Dismiss Complaint as Moot
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Because the Court finds that Gordon’s claims are moot
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Because the Court finds that Gordon’s claims are moot
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Because the Court finds that Gordon’s claims are moot
The other claims Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
In addition, his request for injunctive relief is moot, and he lacks standing to assert it.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Gordon has obtained the relief he sought—the RFI. He therefore no longer has an injury that could be redressed in this case. In addition, his request for injunctive relief is moot, and he lacks standing to assert it.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-22177
Filed
June 14, 2021
Ended
October 18, 2021
Suit's filing to its end
126 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
decided 2021-10-18 says the agency acted (moot); idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Eleventh 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.