Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Michigan

Pena Garcia v. US Department of Homeland Security

Eastern District of MichiganSusan K. DeclercqDecided September 21, 2026

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 DHS Read by a model
The DHS subsequently ordered Pena Garcia to appear to the ICE Detroit field office and to “[b]ring [her] travel plan.”
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Although Pena Garcia frames her requested relief as an administrative correction of a misclassification error, this Court is unable to grant that relief where she was, in fact, properly classified.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 11, is GRANTED, thereby DISMISSING THE CASE.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants thereafter moved to dismiss the Complaint for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction given that Pena Garcia had already left the country.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants thereafter moved to dismiss the Complaint for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction given that Pena Garcia had already left the country.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Thus, this issue is moot, and this Court lacks jurisdiction to change that fact. See Demis, 558 F.3d at 512. Therefore, this Court will dismiss the case.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Accordingly, this matter is now moot.
The other claims Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Thus, this issue is moot, and this Court lacks jurisdiction to change that fact. See Demis, 558 F.3d at 512. Therefore, this Court will dismiss the case.
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 Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied; Held moot Read by a model
over voluntary-departure decisions. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229c(f), 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1240.26(f).
Nationality Mexico Read by a model
Plaintiff Rosa Maria Pena Garcia is a citizen of Mexico

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, this one. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Pena Garcia v. US Department of Homeland Security July 16, 2025 Susan K. DeClercq Denied in the government's favor
Pena Garcia v. US Department of Homeland SecurityThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted September 21, 2026 Susan K. Declercq Dismissed as moot

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Sixth 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.