Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of North Carolina

Samalla v. Jaddou

Eastern District of North CarolinaLouise Wood FlanaganDecided May 30, 2025No. 7:24-cv-00989

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 USCIS Read by a model
Plaintiff sued to compel USCIS to process the applications.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative on behalf of his wife, the Beneficiary, and their daughter,
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff requests that court issue a writ of mandamus against defendants to compel them expeditiously to process his petitions for alien relatives, filed on behalf of plaintiff’s wife and daughter, respectively.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Based on the foregoing, defendant’s motion to dismiss (DE 10) is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and the doctrines of standing and mootness.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
defendants’ motion to dismiss (DE 10), and plaintiff’s motion captioned as one to “Retain Jurisdiction and Monitor Processing at [National Visa Center]” (DE 9).
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Because plaintiff has received the relief he seeks, the suit is moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Plaintiff sued to compel USCIS to process the applications. The applications now have been approved. Because plaintiff has received the relief he seeks, the suit is moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Plaintiff sued to compel USCIS to process the applications. The applications now have been approved. Because plaintiff has received the relief he seeks, the suit is moot.
Months pending 11.7 months from the application to the suit 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
On October 26, 2023, plaintiff filed “Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative on behalf of his wife, the Beneficiary, and their daughter,”
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Because plaintiff has received the relief he seeks, the suit is moot.
Nationality India Read by a model
his wife is a permanent resident of Canada and a citizen of India.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff is a citizen of the United States, while his wife is a permanent resident of Canada and a citizen of India.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 7:24-cv-00989
Filed
October 15, 2024
Ended
May 30, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
227 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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 Fourth 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.