Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of New Mexico

Gardenia Amaro v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of New MexicoLaura N. FashingDecided November 12, 2025No. 1:25-cv-00512

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-765 (EAD); I-918 (U visa); I-918A Read by a model
pending Form I-918 and/or Form(s) I-918A and their related Form(s) I-765
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
an order to compel Defendant to issue a bona fide determination on my pending Form I-918 and/or Form(s) I-918A and their related Form(s) I-765 for work authorization.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for insufficient service of process.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
Although no Defendant has moved to dismiss (or entered an appearance in this litigation), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) permits a court to dismiss an action sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to effect timely service
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for insufficient service of process.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for insufficient service of process.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for insufficient service of process.
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
U visa claims Bona fide determination: dismissed Read by a model
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for insufficient service of process.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-00512
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 11)
Filed
May 30, 2025
Ended
November 12, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
166 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

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 Tenth 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.