Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Texas

Trevino Vallejo v. Jaddou

Southern District of TexasAlfred H BennettDecided March 31, 2026No. 4:25-cv-03300

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 None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
their APA claims and Mandamus Act claims about waiting-list placement
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #18) is hereby GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #18) is hereby GRANTED.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #18) is hereby GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Claims submitted by Plaintiffs who have bona fide determinations or employment authorization are DISMISSED AS MOOT.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #18) is hereby GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
their APA claims and Mandamus Act claims about waiting-list placement and Due Process claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
their APA claims and Mandamus Act claims about waiting-list placement and Due Process claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Claims submitted by Plaintiffs who have bona fide determinations or employment authorization are DISMISSED AS MOOT.
U visa claims Bona fide determination: dismissed; Work permit: dismissed; Waiting list: dismissed Read by a model
their APA claims related to bona fide determinations or employment authorizations are DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1);

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:25-cv-03300
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 43)
Filed
November 14, 2024
Ended
May 22, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
554 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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.