Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Maryland

Tangmoh v. Majorkas

District of MarylandJ. Mark CoulsonDecided May 16, 2022No. 1:21-cv-02792

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
As a result, the Court finds that the pace at which USCIS adjudicates its asylum applications is left to the discretion of the agency.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
A Form I-589 is an application for asylum within the United States.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
The Complaint requests the Court to order Defendants to perform their duties, namely to adjudicate Plaintiff’s application, and award Plaintiff costs of suit.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For these reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 11), treated as a motion to dismiss, is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss must be granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Presently before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss must be granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss must be granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss must be granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Months pending 49.7 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On March 26, 2018, he filed a Form I-589 with the USCIS Arlington Asylum Office.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
Because discretionary acts are precluded from judicial review under the INA, and no exceptions apply (particularly that part of the statute which confers jurisdiction upon courts of appeal in certain scenarios), this Court lacks jurisdiction to review Plaintiff’s claims.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-02792
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 15)
Filed
November 1, 2021
Ended
May 16, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
196 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
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.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

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.