Agam de Maari v. Mendoza Jaddou
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
Two Venezuelan sisters with Temporary Protected Status (TPS) sought judicial review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ denials of their affirmative-asylum applications. The Fifth Circuit held that the denials were not "final agency action" under the Administrative Procedure Act, meaning the district courts lacked subject-matter jurisdiction; it therefore affirmed both dismissals and modified one to be without prejudice.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether the absence of APA final agency action is a jurisdictional bar (Rule 12(b)(1)) or a merits element (Rule 12(b)(6)/Rule 56) in federal court review.
Circuit Positions
Lack of final agency action deprives the court of subject-matter jurisdiction; proper dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1).
Finality is a merits requirement, not jurisdictional; dismissal lies under Rule 12(b)(6) (or summary judgment).
Conflict Summary
The Fifth Circuit treats APA finality as a jurisdictional prerequisite, requiring dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1) when no final agency action exists. The Sixth, Seventh, and D.C. Circuits regard finality as a non-jurisdictional element of the cause of action, leading courts to dismiss for failure to state a claim (Rule 12(b)(6)) rather than for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.