Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

HERNANDEZ v. NOEM

District of ColumbiaReggie B. WaltonDecided July 10, 2026No. 1:25-cv-02344

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 DHS Read by a model
the Secretary’s determination as to whether to grant a noncitizen humanitarian parole and the adjustment of their status under the Cuban Adjustment Act
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
The plaintiffs allege that following their release they have filed applications for adjustment of status under the Cuban Adjustment Act
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
(a) [c]orrect [the p]laintiffs’ custody and entry records to reflect processing under [§ 1225(b)] and to issue the parole documentation required by 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5)(A);
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that it must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
And, because the Court must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint, the Court must deny as moot the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
And, because the Court must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint, the Court must deny as moot the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that it must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that it must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
the Court concludes that it is precluded from providing the plaintiffs their requested relief and therefore must dismiss their APA, Mandamus Act, and constitutional claims.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Therefore, having concluded that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ APA, Mandamus, and constitutional claims, the Court must also dismiss the plaintiffs’ claim pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act.
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
However, for the reasons indicated, the Court concludes that it is precluded from providing the plaintiffs their requested relief and therefore must dismiss their APA, Mandamus Act, and constitutional claims.
Nationality Cuba Read by a model
The plaintiffs in this case are all Cuban nationals currently residing in the United States.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-02344
Filed
July 21, 2025
Ended
July 13, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
357 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
terminated; no disposition recorded

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 D.C. 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.