Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Georgia

Arnold v. Jaddou

Northern District of GeorgiaThomas W. Thrash, JrDecided December 19, 2024No. 1:24-cv-02339

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
The Plaintiffs sought vacatur and review of USCIS’s initial decisions on the basis that they never received the initial NOID, and the Defendants have remedied any error there may have been by reopening the proceedings, reissuing the NOID, and giving the Plaintiffs an opportunity to respond.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition); I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
decisions denying their I-130 Petition for Alien Relative and I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence.
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 6] is GRANTED.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 6] is GRANTED.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 6] is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
The Court finds this action to be moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
The Court finds this action to be moot.
The other claims Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
The Court finds this action to be 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. 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
And because mootness is jurisdictional, the case must be dismissed.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-02339
Filed
May 29, 2024
Ended
December 19, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
204 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
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. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Eleventh 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.