Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 17, 2025

Leon v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Judge
Ho
Docket
1:25-cv-04915
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
ImmigrationCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Leon v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Judge Ho denied as moot Leon’s request to compel adjudication of his work-authorization application.

Who this affects

Olu-Solo Leon, whose petition seeking an order requiring adjudication of his I-765 work-authorization application was denied as moot; the defendants were no longer required to adjudicate that application through this case.

What happened

In Olu-Solo Leon v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services et al., Olu-Solo Leon asked the court to require the defendants to decide his pending I-765 work-authorization application.

The defendants later submitted notices showing that the application had been denied and asked the court to dismiss the case as moot. Because the application had already been adjudicated, the court concluded that there was no longer an issue for it to resolve.

Judge Dale E. Ho denied the petition as moot and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Leon v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services · No. 1:25-cv-04915
Judge
Ho
Date
Nov. 17, 2025

Background

On June 11, 2025, Olu-Solo Leon filed a petition asking the court to order the defendants to adjudicate his I-765 work-authorization application. The opinion states that the application had been pending for nearly a year.

Defendants’ Motion

On November 14, 2025, the defendants filed a letter motion requesting dismissal as moot. They provided documentation showing that denial notices for the application had been sent to Leon and his attorney.

Ruling

The court explained that the only issue was whether to compel adjudication of the application. Because the application had been adjudicated, that issue was moot, meaning there was no longer a live dispute for the court to decide. The court therefore stated that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the action, denied the petition as moot, and requested that the Clerk of Court close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.