Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Texas

Salgar v. Noem

Southern District of TexasLee H RosenthalDecided February 2, 2026No. 4:25-cv-04613

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
Since then, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not taken further "affirmative steps in adjudicating" Salgar's application.
Form or filing I-360 (special immigrant petition); I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
Alexander Salgar is a non-citizen I-360 self-petitioner who alleges that the defendants have failed to timely adjudicate his asylum application.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Salgar seeks an order compelling the defendants to adjudicate his application
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Docket Entry No. 6), is granted on the merits.
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
The defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Docket Entry No. 6), is granted on the merits.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
The defendants have moved to dismiss and, in the alternative, for summary judgment.
Disposition Granted in the government's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
The defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Docket Entry No. 6), is granted on the merits.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
The defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Docket Entry No. 6), is granted on the merits.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
The defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Docket Entry No. 6), is granted on the merits.
Months pending 17.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Salgar filed his application on August 6, 2024;
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
To give him an accelerated place in line would add to the wait another would endure.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:25-cv-04613
Filed
September 28, 2025
Ended
February 2, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
127 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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.