Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Texas

Al Dulaimi v. Jaddou

Northern District of TexasDecided February 5, 2025No. 3:25-cv-00169

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
Al Dulaimi seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the defendants to adjudicate his pending I-485 application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Al Dulaimi seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the defendants to adjudicate his pending I-485 application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The Court thus DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE this case.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
The Court will not proceed amidst such jurisdictional uncertainty.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The Court thus DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE this case.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
The Court thus DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE this case.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The Court thus DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE this case.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
The Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate what Congress has said it cannot adjudicate, and plaintiffs have failed to present any statutory authority proving the government lacks discretion regarding the actions they challenge.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:25-cv-00169
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 4)
Filed
January 22, 2025
Ended
November 12, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
294 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 13 (dismissed: settled)

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

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

Supreme Court and Fifth 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.