Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Texas

Tankoano v. Jaddou

Southern District of TexasLee H RosenthalDecided January 25, 2023No. 4:22-cv-02757

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 USCIS is responsible for the adjudication of naturalization applications and is the appropriate defendant in a § 1447(b) action.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
Tankoano then applied for naturalization based on his military service under 8 U.S.C. § 1440, by filing an N-400 with the USCIS in May 2020.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
The remaining defendant is USCIS, and the remaining claim relates to Tankoano’s application for naturalization pending before USCIS and governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The motion for partial dismissal, (Docket Entry No. 11), is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The government moved for partial dismissal, asserting limitations, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim against all defendants except USCIS.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
The government moved for partial dismissal, asserting limitations, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim against all defendants except USCIS.
Disposition Dismissed in part; some claims go on The government's motion to dismiss was granted in part: some claims were dismissed and others go on. Read by a model
The remaining defendant is USCIS, and the remaining claim relates to Tankoano’s application for naturalization pending before USCIS and governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
The remaining defendant is USCIS, and the remaining claim relates to Tankoano’s application for naturalization pending before USCIS and governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
The remaining defendant is USCIS, and the remaining claim relates to Tankoano’s application for naturalization pending before USCIS and governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
the court grants the dismissal of Tankoano’s claims under 8 U.S.C. § 1503(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 2201 because Tankoano did not file his case within five years of the final administrative decision denying his passport application.
Months pending 27 months from the application to the suit; 32.4 months from the application to the court's decision A section 1447(b) suit: these months run from the naturalization application. The statute's 120 days run from the interview, which they do not measure. Read by a model
Tankoano then applied for naturalization based on his military service under 8 U.S.C. § 1440, by filing an N-400 with the USCIS in May 2020.
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. 4:22-cv-02757
Filed
August 15, 2022
Ended
May 8, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
266 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
stipulated dismissal 2023-05-08; idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

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.