Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Ohio

Minhui Liang v. Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Securtiy

Southern District of OhioSarah D. MorrisonDecided May 12, 2026No. 2:25-cv-01059

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 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 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 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
asking the Court to order U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate her application (Form I-485) to register for permanent residence or adjust status.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
her application (Form I-485) to register for permanent residence or adjust status.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
asking the Court to order U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate her application (Form I-485) to register for permanent residence or adjust status.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Court DISMISSES this case for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
Accordingly, considering Plaintiff’s failure to respond and the Court’s warning as to the same, the Court DISMISSES this case for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
the Court DISMISSES this case for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court DISMISSES this case for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
the Court DISMISSES this case for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-01059
Filed
September 16, 2025
Ended
May 12, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
238 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
idb disp 17 (judgment: other), 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 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.