Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Ohio

Jamil v. Secretary of U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Northern District of OhioPamela Ann BarkerDecided September 25, 2026No. 1:26-cv-01200

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 I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
Plaintiff’s two longpending Form I-130 Petitions for Alien Relative (‘Form I-130’)
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
seeks to compel a discrete agency action from Defendants to adjudicate at least one of Plaintiff’s two longpending Form I-130 Petitions for Alien Relative (‘Form I-130’) that have been unreasonably delayed.
Kind of order A stipulated or agreed order Read by a model
Accordingly, based upon Jamil’s express non-opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
Accordingly, based upon Jamil’s express non-opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On August 26, 2026, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss.
Disposition Stipulated or agreed order An order the parties asked for together, or the plaintiff's own dismissal. Not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
Accordingly, based upon Jamil’s express non-opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Accordingly, based upon Jamil’s express non-opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, based upon Jamil’s express non-opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss.
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. 1:26-cv-01200
Filed
May 25, 2026
Ended
September 25, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
123 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
terminated; no disposition recorded

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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.