Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of New York

Pierre v. McElroy

Southern District of New YorkNaomi Reice BuchwaldDecided December 4, 2001

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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 Not recorded Read by a model
Form or filing I-360 (special immigrant petition); I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status ("the I-360 petition") and applied for an adjustment of status ("the I-485 application")
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
but only that the INS do or ensure that the investigation and evaluation (i.e. adjudication) of the petition and application be done in good faith and within the necessary time frame
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
We issue this Memorandum to explain the basis for the signing of an Order to Show Cause containing a temporary restraining order.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
We issue this Memorandum to explain the basis for the signing of an Order to Show Cause containing a temporary restraining order.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
We issue this Memorandum to explain the basis for the signing of an Order to Show Cause containing a temporary restraining order. In brief, the background for plaintiff's application is as follows.
Disposition Granted in the applicant's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
the temporary restraining order was signed.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
the temporary restraining order was signed.
The delay claim Relief ordered Read by a model
the INS had not fulfilled the duty imposed by Congress and because without action by the Court the status quo could not be preserved and plaintiff afforded the opportunity for the relief Congress intended, the temporary restraining order was signed.
Months pending 17.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On June 22, 2000, at the age of 19, plaintiff Vinette D. Pierre petitioned the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS") for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status ("the I-360 petition")
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

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 Second 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.