Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Louisiana

Isleem v. Peacock

Eastern District of LouisianaJay C. ZaineyDecided August 21, 2024No. 2:24-cv-00559

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
Isleem alleges that although he has issued repeated requests to USCIS, the defendants have refused to adjudicate his Form I-485 in bad faith.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
Desiring to register for permanent resident status or otherwise adjust his status, Isleem filed a Form I-485 with USCIS.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
First, Isleem argues that, under the INA, the defendants “have a clear duty” to adjudicate his Form I-485.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 8), filed by all defendants, is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The defendants have moved to dismiss all causes of action under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 8), filed by all defendants, is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The cause of action stated under the INA and the failure to act cause of action under the APA are each DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. All other causes of action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 8), filed by all defendants, is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The cause of action stated under the INA and the failure to act cause of action under the APA are each DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
All other causes of action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
As described above, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(B) strips this Court of jurisdiction to review any decision or action of the Attorney General that is discretionary.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-00559
Filed
March 5, 2024
Ended
August 21, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
169 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
judgment 2024-08-21 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.

Supreme Court and Fifth 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.