Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Texas

Yoo v. FBI NICS

Northern District of TexasMark PittmanDecided August 20, 2021

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 FBI Read by a model
The Court authorized service of process of Yoo’s remaining claims upon the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”).
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Seeking injunctive relief, Yoo claims that he was improperly classified as a “prohibited person” within the NICS
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
OPINION and ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
It is therefore ORDERED that the FBI’s motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) is GRANTED
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Now pending is the FBI’s motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), along with an appendix thereto.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Yoo’s remaining claims in the complaint for mandamus relief must be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, and alternatively, DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Yoo’s remaining claims in the complaint for mandamus relief must be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, and alternatively, DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
As such, Yoo’s claims against the FBI must be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of jurisdiction.
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

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 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.