Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Almerdaei v. Trump

Eastern District of New YorkEric R. KomiteeDecided March 12, 2021No. 1:19-cv-00830

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 DHS Read by a model
This Court cannot instruct the Department of Homeland Security to “set up a specific guideline and application process for the waiver with a set adjudication time,” for example, when the waiver at issue is encapsulated in a presidential proclamation that is no longer on the books.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiffs also sought a judgment directing the Defendants to “adjudicate Plaintiffs’ applications and issue a final determination on Plaintiffs’ applications for immigrant visas within 15 days.”
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
They asked the Court to “[i]nstruct that DHS set up a specific guideline and application process for the waiver with a set adjudication time,”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed as moot. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment and close the case.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
In light of PP 10141, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed as moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed as moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed as moot.
The other claims Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed as 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
The claims for injunctive relief related to the implementation of the waiver process have been mooted by the withdrawal of the proclamation: there is simply no longer any conduct to enjoin.
Nationality Yemen Read by a model
The Plaintiffs in this case are Yemeni nationals who applied for immigrant visas and their U.S.-citizen sponsors.
212(f) proclamation Proclamation 9645 Read by a model
When the case was filed, the Plaintiffs were subject to Presidential Proclamation No. 9645

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:19-cv-00830
Filed
February 11, 2019
Ended
March 15, 2021
Suit's filing to its end
763 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 17 (judgment: other), judgment for unknown

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 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.