Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Texas
Guerra Quezada v. United States
Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener
2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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
Tae Johnson, Acting Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”); Merrick Garland, Former U.S. Attorney General; and ICE Officer John Doe(s), in their various official capacities (collectively, “Defendants”) |
|---|---|
| Form or filing | None named Read by a model |
| What the suit asked for | Not recorded Read by a model |
| Kind of order |
A ruling on a motion or the petition
Read by a model
the court grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) and dismisses without prejudice this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1). |
| Motion decided |
Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction
Read by a model
Accordingly, the court grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) and dismisses without prejudice this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1). |
| Whose motion |
The government's motion
Read by a model
the court grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) |
| Disposition |
Dismissed
The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness.
Read by a model
Accordingly, the court grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) and dismisses without prejudice this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1). |
| Prevailing party |
Government
Read by a model
Accordingly, the court grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) and dismisses without prejudice this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1). |
| The other claims |
Dismissed
Read by a model
the court grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) and dismisses without prejudice this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1). |
| 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 |
| Nationality |
Mexico
Read by a model
Mr. Guerra Quezada was born in Tamaulipas, Mexico, on February 15, 1993, and is a Mexican national |
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 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.
-
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55
Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Cheejati v. Blinken, 106 F.4th 388
Fifth Circuit, July 5, 2024. The pace at which USCIS adjudicates adjustment applications during visa retrogression is a discretionary action under § 1255(a) that § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) shields from review, agreeing with the Eighth Circuit's Thigulla.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Mendoza-Tarango v. Flores, 982 F.3d 395
Fifth Circuit, December 8, 2020. A § 706(1) or mandamus claim requires a discrete, legally required action, and USCIS had no nondiscretionary duty to administer the naturalization oath at a prison.
ImmCite: unchecked, treatment not confirmed yet, not evidence either way. ImmCite has found no published decision citing this case as of 2026-11-01; it checks for new citing decisions daily. That is not a determination that the case is good law. The citation index lists 7 other decisions citing it, none a Supreme Court, BIA or Attorney General precedent or a published circuit opinion; ImmCite's status does not review them.