Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Illinois

Adebowale v. Johnson

Northern District of IllinoisJohn J. Tharp, JrDecided June 28, 2018No. 1:17-cv-00476

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
After Adebowale’s complaint was filed, USCIS reversed course and determined that it had jurisdiction over Adebowale’s adjustment of status petition.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
A few months later, Adebowale filed an I-485 form seeking an adjustment of status to become a permanent resident.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Here, Adebowale has been provided with the relief sought in the complaint, namely, a merits adjudication of his adjustment of status petition.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the motion to dismiss is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
The government now moves to dismiss Adebowale’s complaint as moot, based on USCIS’s decision to entertain his petition, and for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
The government now moves to dismiss Adebowale’s complaint as moot, based on USCIS’s decision to entertain his petition, and for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Adebowale’s challenge to USCIS’s failure to exercise jurisdiction over his adjustment of status petition is therefore moot, and not rescued by the voluntary cessation doctrine.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Adebowale’s challenge to USCIS’s failure to exercise jurisdiction over his adjustment of status petition is therefore moot, and not rescued by the voluntary cessation doctrine.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
The dismissal is with prejudice as to claims presented in the complaint, and this case, but is without prejudice to any future challenge Adebowale may present with respect to the denial of his adjustment of status petition.
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
Adebowale’s challenge to USCIS’s failure to exercise jurisdiction over his adjustment of status petition is therefore moot, and not rescued by the voluntary cessation doctrine.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:17-cv-00476
Filed
January 20, 2017
Ended
June 28, 2018
Suit's filing to its end
524 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
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 Seventh 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.