Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Massachusetts

Vega-Del Roquel v. Barr

District of MassachusettsNathaniel M. GortonDecided October 25, 2021

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 EOIR Read by a model
Plaintiffs seek a writ of mandamus compelling BIA to exercise jurisdiction over all plaintiffs and to reinstate Vega- Del Roquel’s appeal on behalf of all plaintiffs.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiffs seek a writ of mandamus compelling BIA to exercise jurisdiction over all plaintiffs and to reinstate Vega- Del Roquel’s appeal on behalf of all plaintiffs.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, defendants’ motion to dismiss (Docket No. 10) is ALLOWED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
In opposing a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the Court has jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Pending before the Court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, defendants’ motion to dismiss (Docket No. 10) is ALLOWED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Accordingly, defendants’ motion to dismiss (Docket No. 10) is ALLOWED.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
For these reasons, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ claim.
Months pending 42.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Counsel subsequently filed a timely appeal with the BIA in April, 2018 on behalf of Vega- Del Roquel but not Karla or Diego.
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 First 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.