Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Texas

Mahmoud v. Mayorkas et al

Northern District of TexasDecided August 22, 2025No. 4:24-cv-00589

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

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 USCIS Read by a model
In adjudicating asylum applications, the USCIS utilizes the “last in, first out (“LIFO”) rule,” which “is a capacity-based scheduling system.”
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
Form I-589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding Removal
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
requesting this Court compel Defendants to schedule his initial interview and adjudicate his asylum application.
Kind of order A magistrate judge's recommendation Read by a model
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
This motion was converted by Order [doc. 17] of this Court into a Motion for Summary Judgment (hereinafter “Motion for Summary Judgment”).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
While the Court converted Defendants’ 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss into a Motion for Summary Judgment
Disposition Magistrate judge's recommendation A magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district judge decides whether to adopt it, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
RECOMMENDS that Defendants’ motion be GRANTED.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
However, to the extent that Mahmoud takes issue with Defendants’ use of the LIFO, the Court does not have jurisdiction to review this claim.
Months pending 15.1 months from the application to the suit; 29 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Mahmoud’s Form I-589 was received by Defendants on March 23, 2023.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablenot reached
  • 3. Human health and welfarenot reached
  • 4. Competing prioritiesnot reached
  • 5. Interests prejudicednot reached
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
However, as Defendants have identified, many courts, within and outside this Circuit, have found LIFO to be a rule of reason.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Egypt Read by a model
a native and citizen of the Arab Republic of Egypt

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Mahmoud v. Mayorkas et alThis decision August 22, 2025 Magistrate judge's recommendation
Mahmoud v. MayorkasThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted September 22, 2025 Mark Pittman Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:24-cv-00589
Filed
June 24, 2024
Ended
September 22, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
455 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for unknown

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 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.