Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Xie v. Scott

Eastern District of New YorkRamon E. Reyes Jr.Decided May 13, 2026No. 1:25-cv-01244

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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
Xie sought an order to compel defendants to schedule an interview with a USCIS agent.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
asserting an unreasonable delay in adjudication of her I-589 application.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
asserting an unreasonable delay in adjudication of her I-589 application. (ECF No. 1 at 3–4). Xie sought an order to compel defendants to schedule an interview with a USCIS agent.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, the action is dismissed without prejudice.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
On August 11, 2025, the Court directed Xie to explain by September 1, 2025, whether she intended to continue litigating the case, and why the complaint should not be dismissed as moot.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
The Order stated that plaintiff’s “failure to respond by 9/1/2025 will likely result in the dismissal of this action as moot.” (Id.) Xie did not reply to the defendants’ response or to the Court’s Order. Accordingly, the action is dismissed without prejudice.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
The Order stated that plaintiff’s “failure to respond by 9/1/2025 will likely result in the dismissal of this action as moot.” (Id.) Xie did not reply to the defendants’ response or to the Court’s Order. Accordingly, the action is dismissed without prejudice.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
The Order stated that plaintiff’s “failure to respond by 9/1/2025 will likely result in the dismissal of this action as moot.” (Id.) Xie did not reply to the defendants’ response or to the Court’s Order. Accordingly, the action is dismissed without prejudice.
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 Held moot Read by a model
The Order stated that plaintiff’s “failure to respond by 9/1/2025 will likely result in the dismissal of this action as moot.” (Id.) Xie did not reply to the defendants’ response or to the Court’s Order. Accordingly, the action is dismissed without prejudice.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-01244
Filed
March 27, 2025
Ended
May 14, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
413 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 17 (judgment: other), judgment for defendant

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 Second 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.