Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Sluss v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of ColumbiaEllen Segal HuvelleDecided October 20, 2012

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
By letter of July 12, 2012, USCIS advised plaintiff that it could not proceed on his request “at this time” because a person renouncing his U.S. citizenship “while present in the United States [must] appear for an interview in person at a designated USCIS office.”
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
he seeks from the instant complaint an order to compel defendants to act on his alleged renunciation of citizenship under § 1481(a)(6) of the INA
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Since the USCIS has now performed its ministerial duty with regard to plaintiff’s request to renounce his citizenship under § 1481(a)(6), the Court will grant defendants’ motion to dismiss the mandamus claim as moot.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Since the USCIS has now performed its ministerial duty with regard to plaintiff’s request to renounce his citizenship under § 1481(a)(6), the Court will grant defendants’ motion to dismiss the mandamus claim as moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Since the USCIS has now performed its ministerial duty with regard to plaintiff’s request to renounce his citizenship under § 1481(a)(6), the Court will grant defendants’ motion to dismiss the mandamus claim as moot.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
In addition, the Court finds that plaintiff has stated no claim under the APA and, therefore, will dismiss the case.
Months pending 8.4 months from the application to the suit; 12.2 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
By letter of July 12, 2012, USCIS advised plaintiff that it could not proceed on his request “at this time”
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Since the USCIS has now performed its ministerial duty with regard to plaintiff’s request to renounce his citizenship under § 1481(a)(6), the Court will grant defendants’ motion to dismiss the mandamus claim as moot.
Nationality United States Read by a model
a dual citizen of the United States and Canada[,]

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 D.C. 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.