Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of New York

Assaidi v. Wolf

Southern District of New YorkEdgardo RamosDecided July 13, 2021No. 1:21-cv-05991

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
Plaintiffs allege that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) improperly denied their I-130 petitions, filed between October 2014 and March 30, 2017.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
Plaintiffs allege that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) improperly denied their I-130 petitions, filed between October 2014 and March 30, 2017.
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
the Court construes the motion as one brought under Rule 12(b)(6) rather than one brought under Rule 12(b)(1).
Disposition Granted in the government's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs’ counter-motion for leave to amend in DENIED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs’ counter-motion for leave to amend in DENIED.
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
Plaintiffs concede that the El Naham Family’s claims have been rendered moot. Doc. 97 at 2. The Court agrees.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-05991
Filed
July 13, 2021
Ended
March 2, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
232 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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