Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of New York

Mustafa v. Meissner

Southern District of New YorkKoeltlDecided November 18, 1996

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 Not recorded Read by a model
Form or filing I-131 (travel document) Read by a model
On September 2, 1994, the plaintiff sent to the INS an application for advance parole
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
to grant him advance parole so that he can reenter the United States after travel-ling abroad.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment is granted, and the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied.
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment is granted, and the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
The plaintiff now moves for summary judgment. The defendants' cross-move to dismiss the complaint or, in the alternative, for summary judgment.
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 reasons stated above, the defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment is granted, and the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment is granted, and the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied.
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
Accordingly, the plaintiffs motion for a mandatory injunction is denied, and the defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted.
Months pending 0.3 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On September 12, 1994, the INS denied the plaintiffs request
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Bangladesh Read by a model
The plaintiff is a citizen of Bangladesh residing in the United States.

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 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.