Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Texas

Martinez Rodriguez v. Warden, Bluebonnet Detention Center

Northern District of TexasJames Wesley HendrixDecided February 3, 2026No. 1:26-cv-00044

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 ICE Read by rule
which was ultimately dismissed,1 ICE re-detained Martinez Rodriguez. Id. He has remained in detention since and is currently detained at the Bluebonnet Detention Center in
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by rule
Accordingly, his habeas claim for relief against transfer during the pendency of proceedings (Dkt. No. 1 at 14–15) and his pending TRO motion (Dkt. No. 3) are denied as moot.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:26-cv-00044
Filed
February 1, 2026
Ended
February 3, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
2 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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

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Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only.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.