A common and often favorable outcome — but one that requires a few procedural follow-up steps.
It is quite common for a government respondent to adjudicate the underlying matter shortly after being served with a mandamus petition, effectively achieving the petitioner's practical goal without a contested court ruling.
The case typically becomes moot
Once the government has performed the requested action, there is generally no longer a live controversy for the court to resolve, and the government will often move to dismiss the case as moot, or the parties will agree to a voluntary dismissal.
Confirming the action fully resolves the matter
Before dismissing the case, petitioners should confirm the government's action genuinely resolves the underlying request — for example, verifying a decision was actually issued, not merely that some intermediate procedural step occurred.
Addressing attorney's fees before dismissal
Petitioners represented by counsel should discuss whether to pursue attorney's fees under an applicable fee-shifting statute before agreeing to dismiss the case, since dismissal timing and terms can affect eligibility for fee recovery.
What if only part of the request is granted
If the government's action only partially resolves the matter — for example, adjudicating one linked application but leaving another pending — petitioners can often narrow the case to the remaining live issues rather than dismissing it entirely.
Formalizing the resolution
Depending on the court and the parties' preference, the case may be closed through a stipulated dismissal, a joint status report followed by a dismissal order, or a settlement agreement memorializing the resolution.
Why this is the most common ending
A large share of delay cases end this way: the agency adjudicates while the case is pending, and the request to compel adjudication has nothing left to operate on. A federal court can decide only live controversies, so once the decision issues the claim is ordinarily moot and the case is dismissed.
Petitioners often find this deflating and it should not be. The purpose of the filing was a decision, and a decision arrived. What matters next is checking that the decision actually resolves the matter rather than deferring it.
Check what was granted before agreeing to dismiss
| What the agency did | Is the claim over? |
|---|---|
| Adjudicated the application, favorably or not | Yes; the duty was to decide, and it was performed |
| Issued a request for more evidence | No; the file is still pending and no decision has been made |
| Decided one of several pending matters | Partly; the remaining matters keep the case alive |
| Reopened the matter after deciding | Depends; a decision followed by reopening may leave nothing final |
The second row causes the most trouble. An agency that responds to a lawsuit by issuing an evidence request has moved the file without deciding it, and a petitioner who agrees to dismissal at that point has given up the case and obtained nothing.
Fees, and the rule that decides them
Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), a prevailing party in a civil action against the United States may recover fees where the government's position was not substantially justified and no special circumstances make an award unjust, subject to eligibility limits and a statutory rate.
The obstacle is the words prevailing party. In Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598 (2001), the Supreme Court rejected the catalyst theory, holding that a party does not prevail merely by prompting a voluntary change in the defendant's conduct; there must be a judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties. An agency that simply adjudicates and moves to dismiss usually leaves nothing that qualifies. Any fee question should be raised before dismissal is agreed, not after, and a stipulated dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) can record whatever the parties settle.
Key points
- Most delay cases end with the agency deciding while the case is pending, which ordinarily moots the claim.
- A request for more evidence is not a decision, and agreeing to dismiss at that point gives up the case for nothing.
- The Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), allows fees only to a prevailing party.
- Buckhannon, 532 U.S. 598 (2001), rejected the catalyst theory, so prompting voluntary action is generally not prevailing.
- Raise any fee question before agreeing to dismissal, and record the terms in a stipulated dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).