Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Illinois

Albarran v. Wong

Northern District of IllinoisMarvin E. AspenDecided January 19, 2016No. 1:15-cv-05691

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 ICE Read by a model
On June 17, 2015, ICE denied Flores’ request for a stay of removal.
Form or filing I-246 Read by a model
Shortly thereafter, Flores filed a Form 1-246, an application for a stay of removal.
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Presently before us is Defendants’ motion to dismiss, which we grant for the reasons discussed below.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants’ motion challenges our jurisdiction and thus falls under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Presently before us is Defendants’ motion to dismiss, which we grant for the reasons discussed below.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
While we are not unsympathetic to the serious consequences facing Flores and his family, we lack jurisdiction over his claims and must grant Defendants’ motion and terminate this case.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
While we are not unsympathetic to the serious consequences facing Flores and his family, we lack jurisdiction over his claims and must grant Defendants’ motion and terminate this case.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
While we are not unsympathetic to the serious consequences facing Flores and his family, we lack jurisdiction over his claims and must grant Defendants’ motion and terminate this case.
Months pending 2.7 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On September 15, 2015, ICE denied this second petition for a stay of removal.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Mexico Read by a model
Plaintiff Julian Flores Albarran (“Flores”), a Mexican citizen

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:15-cv-05691
Filed
June 26, 2015
Ended
January 19, 2016
Suit's filing to its end
207 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.

Supreme Court and Seventh 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.