Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of New Mexico

Sheladia v. Noem

District of New MexicoLorenzo F GarciaDecided April 21, 2026No. 2:26-cv-00201

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 USCIS Read by a model
Defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) adjudicated the I-30 Petition in early April 2026.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
I-30 Petition for Alien Relative.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff Parth Sheladia’s Complaint for Writ of Mandamus (“Complaint”), Doc. 1, sought an order compelling Defendants to adjudicate Sheladia’s I-30 Petition for Alien Relative.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, this case must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), this civil action shall be dismissed without prejudice.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Dismiss the Case as Moot
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Defendants argue that USCIS’s action rendered the Complaint moot. Id. at 1. The Court agrees.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Defendants argue that USCIS’s action rendered the Complaint moot. Id. at 1. The Court agrees.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Defendants argue that USCIS’s action rendered the Complaint moot. Id. at 1. The Court agrees.
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
Defendants argue that USCIS’s action rendered the Complaint moot. Id. at 1. The Court agrees.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:26-cv-00201
Filed
January 29, 2026
Ended
April 21, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
82 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
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 Tenth 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.