Guo v. Mayorkas
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:24-cv-04716
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Guo v. Mayorkas, Judge Engelmayer dismissed the minors’ petition seeking an order requiring immigration decisions without prejudice, citing capacity and possible mootness.
Haoran Guo and Zijun Guo’s petition seeking adjudication of their lawful-permanent-residence applications was dismissed without prejudice; the federal immigration officials named as defendants were no longer required to litigate this closed case.
What happened
In Guo v. Mayorkas, Haoran Guo and Zijun Guo, who were minors and represented themselves, asked the court to require federal immigration officials to decide their applications for lawful permanent residence. A magistrate judge recommended dismissing the petition without prejudice, and no party objected.
The court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and adopted it in full. It noted that minors generally cannot bring lawsuits on their own and that the plaintiffs had not requested legal counsel, a guardian, or another representative. The court also noted that the agency approved the applications in August and September 2024, suggesting that the case may be moot. The petition was dismissed without prejudice, and the case was closed.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review under the recommendation’s instructions. He directed the clerk to terminate the pending motion, close the case, and mail the decision to the petitioners.
The detailed version
- Guo v. Mayorkas · No. 1:24-cv-04716
- Paul Engelmayer
- Dec. 5, 2024
Background
Haoran Guo and Zijun Guo, identified as minor plaintiffs proceeding without lawyers, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. They sought an order requiring Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Tamika Gray, and USCIS Deputy Director Scott Velez to adjudicate their applications for lawful permanent residence in the United States.
The matter came before the district court on United States Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave’s Report and Recommendation. Judge Cave recommended dismissing the petition without prejudice. No party filed objections.
Court’s analysis
Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. The court found no such error and adopted Judge Cave’s recommendation in full.
The court stated that minors lack the capacity to bring suit themselves. It also noted that the plaintiffs had not requested permission to proceed without paying filing fees, counsel, or the appointment of a guardian or other appropriate representative. The court therefore declined to seek free legal representation for them. It further stated that the plaintiffs’ chances of success were “extremely slim.”
The court also noted that USCIS approved the Guos’ applications on August 28, 2024, and September 20, 2024. The court said those approvals suggested that the case was moot, meaning that there might no longer be a live dispute requiring judicial relief. The opinion does not separately state a final finding that the case was moot.
Disposition
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety and dismissed the petition without prejudice. It directed the clerk to terminate the motion at Docket 18, close the case, and mail a copy of the decision to the petitioners at the address on file.
The court also stated that, because the Report warned that failing to object within 14 days would waive objections and prevent appellate review, the parties’ failure to object operated as a waiver of appellate review.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.