Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Texas

CTM v. Moore

Northern District of TexasJane J BoyleDecided March 16, 2020No. 3:20-cv-00540

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 ICE Read by a model
Despite this evidence, however, DHS did not transfer C.T.M. to HHS, because Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—an agency of DHS—determined that she was an adult.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
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
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES C.T.M.’s motion for a TRO (Doc. 8).
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
Before the Court is Petitioner C.T.M.’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) (Doc. 8).
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is Petitioner C.T.M.’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) (Doc. 8).
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES C.T.M.’s motion for a TRO (Doc. 8).
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES C.T.M.’s motion for a TRO (Doc. 8).
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
As discussed above, C.T.M.’s new unreasonable delay allegation does not warrant injunctive relief either, because even if she could prevail on a substantive due process claim based on the delay, she has not shown irreparable harm.
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES C.T.M.’s motion for a TRO (Doc. 8).
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Congo Read by a model
C.T.M. is a national of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:20-cv-00540
Filed
March 2, 2020
Ended
July 28, 2020
Suit's filing to its end
148 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
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.

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.