Passim

Mandamus decisions / Middle District of Pennsylvania

Pena Grullon v. Barr

Middle District of PennsylvaniaRobert D MarianiDecided February 25, 2021

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
He asserts that the “United States Citizenship and Immigration Services” (‘USCIS’) initially delayed, and then wrongfully denied his N-400 Application for Naturalization, filed on February 24(sic), 2011.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
Our consideration is limited to his request for relief related to his February 28, 2011, N-400 Application.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
He is seeking immediate release or, in the alternative, “a constitutionally adequate hearing” on his N-400 Application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) will be granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Based on the foregoing discussion, Defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) will be granted.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Presently pending is Defendants’ motion to dismiss Pena Grullon’s complaint
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Additionally, any request pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b) is moot because Plaintiff waited until the USCIS had made a determination to seek relief.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Based on the foregoing discussion, Defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) will be granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Hence, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Pena Grullon’s request for relief pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).
The other claims Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
As he has since been removed from the United States, his request for immediate release is rendered moot.
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. A section 1447(b) suit: these months run from the naturalization application. The statute's 120 days run from the interview, which they do not measure. Read by a model
Our consideration is limited to his request for relief related to his February 28, 2011, N-400 Application.
Months since the naturalization interview 27.7 months from the interview (2011-06-13) Read by a model
An Immigration Officer interviewed him on June 13, 2011, at which time he successfully passed the English-Writing and History and Government tests.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
As he has since been removed from the United States, his request for immediate release is rendered moot.
Nationality Dominican Republic Read by a model
Pena Grullon, a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic,

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Third 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.