Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Texas

Patil v. Garland et al

Western District of TexasElizabeth S. ChestneyDecided May 6, 2025No. 5:24-cv-00475

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
The Notice advises the Court that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) issued a denial notice to Plaintiff regarding his Form I-360 petition.
Form or filing I-360 (special immigrant petition); I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
Form I-360 (self-petition under the Violence Against Women Act) and associated pending Form I-485 (Application to Register Permanent Residence).
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s requested relief in his Complaint is the adjudication of his pending Form I-360 and Form I-485—and these applications have both been adjudicated and denied—all relief Plaintiff requested has been granted.
Kind of order A magistrate judge's recommendation Read by a model
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
On April 15, 2025, Defendants moved to dismiss the case for mootness under Federal Rule of Procedure 12(b)(1) [#16].
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This Report and Recommendation concerns Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [#16].
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
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
This case is therefore moot. Because the Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [#16] should be granted.
The other claims Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
This case is therefore moot. Because the Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [#16] should be granted.
Months pending 36 months from the application to the suit; 45.2 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
According to Defendants, Plaintiff’s Form I-360 was denied on February 18, 2025, and his Form I-485 was denied on April 4, 2025.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
This case is therefore moot. Because the Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [#16] should be granted.
Nationality India Read by a model
Plaintiff, who is a citizen of India

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
Patil v. Garland et alThis decision May 6, 2025 Elizabeth S. Chestney Magistrate judge's recommendation
Patil v. Garland et alThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted July 7, 2025 Orlando L. Garcia Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 5:24-cv-00475
Filed
May 9, 2024
Ended
July 7, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
424 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2025-07-07 for the defendants, ground not stated; 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.