Passim

Mandamus decisions / Middle District of Georgia

ARGUELLES v. NIELSEN

Middle District of GeorgiaStephen HylesDecided January 27, 2023

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 EOIR Read by a model
He alleged Defendants—and especially the EOIR through the actions of the IJ—violated the stipulation by raising a jurisdictional objection to CAT relief.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
His requested relief included a demand that the Court order the IJ to “conduct proceedings to determine whether Plaintiff faces continued torture as defined by [CAT].”
Kind of order A magistrate judge's recommendation Read by a model
For the reasons explained above, the Court RECOMMENDS that Arguelles’s motion to reopen (ECF No. 26) be DENIED.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Freddy Jose Arguelles’s motion to reopen this case and enforce the parties’ joint stipulation (ECF No. 26).
Disposition Magistrate judge's recommendation A magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district judge decides whether to adopt it, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
For the reasons explained above, the Court RECOMMENDS that Arguelles’s motion to reopen (ECF No. 26) be DENIED.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
For the reasons explained above, the Court RECOMMENDS that Arguelles’s motion to reopen (ECF No. 26) be DENIED.
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
For the reasons explained above, the Court RECOMMENDS that Arguelles’s motion to reopen (ECF No. 26) be DENIED.
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 Venezuela Read by a model
Arguelles, a native and citizen of Venezuela, was granted lawful permanent residence in 2006.

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 Eleventh 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.