Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Iowa

Gonzalez Pena v. Department of Homeland Security

Northern District of IowaLeonard T StrandDecided January 13, 2026No. 1:25-cv-00145

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 Not recorded Read by a model
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
petitioners allege that they are “subject to an immigration detainer and, pursuant to a recent executive order, the respondents are compelled to expedite [their] removal.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The nearly identical motions (C25-0141-LTS, Doc. 6; C25-0145-LTS, Doc. 6) to dismiss in these cases are granted for the same reasons articulated by Chief Judge Williams:
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
These two cases are before me on motions (C25-0141-LTS, Doc. 6; C25-0145- LTS, Doc. 6) to dismiss filed by the respondents.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
These two cases are before me on motions (C25-0141-LTS, Doc. 6; C25-0145- LTS, Doc. 6) to dismiss filed by the respondents.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Thus, their writs are dismissed.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Thus, their writs are dismissed.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Thus, their writs are dismissed.
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. 1:25-cv-00145
Filed
September 5, 2025
Ended
January 13, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
130 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2026-01-13 dismisses for want of jurisdiction; idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), 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 Eighth 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.