Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Texas

Vurimindi v. Mayorkas

Western District of TexasSusan HightowerDecided March 22, 2023No. 1:23-cv-00220

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 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 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 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
Plaintiff also sought temporary proof of LPR status from the USCIS San Antonio Field Office.
Form or filing I-90 (green card renewal) Read by a model
Plaintiff also alleges that he filed an Application To Replace Permanent Resident Card (I-90) with the Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) on November 13, 2022.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
The same day, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit seeking a declaration that Defendants must provide him with proof of his LPR status and an order compelling them to do so.
Kind of order A magistrate judge's recommendation Read by a model
This Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the District Court DISMISS Plaintiff's lawsuit as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and DISMISS AS MOOT his Motion to Appoint Counsel (Dkt. 1).
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
Because Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court is required by standing order to review his Complaint under § 1915(e)(2).
Disposition Magistrate judge's recommendation A magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district judge decides whether to adopt it, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
This Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the District Court DISMISS Plaintiff's lawsuit as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and DISMISS AS MOOT his Motion to Appoint Counsel (Dkt. 1).
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
This Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the District Court DISMISS Plaintiff's lawsuit as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and DISMISS AS MOOT his Motion to Appoint Counsel (Dkt. 1).
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court recommends that this duplicative lawsuit should be dismissed as frivolous.
Months pending 3.5 months from the application to the suit; 4.2 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff also alleges that he filed an Application To Replace Permanent Resident Card (I-90) with the Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) on November 13, 2022.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-00220
Filed
February 27, 2023
Ended
March 29, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
30 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
decided 2023-03-29 says the agency acted (moot); 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 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.