Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Illinois

Haus v. Kelly

Northern District of IllinoisMatthew F. KennellyDecided February 23, 2018No. 1:17-cv-04972

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 USCIS Read by a model
For the past three years, he has been waiting for USCIS to review the petitions and place him and his wife on the U visa waiting list so that they may apply for work authorization.
Form or filing I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
On November 20, 2014, Haus submitted a petition for U nonimmigrant status for himself and another petition for his wife, as a qualifying family member.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
He alleges that this three-year delay—just to be placed on the waiting list—is unreasonable, and he asks the Court to compel defendants to act on his petitions.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons stated below, the Court grants defendants' motion in part and denies it in part.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants have moved to dismiss Haus's complaint for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss Haus's complaint for failure to state a claim.
Disposition Dismissed in part; some claims go on The government's motion to dismiss was granted in part: some claims were dismissed and others go on. Read by a model
The Court therefore denies defendants' motion to dismiss Haus's claim for relief under the APA.
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
The Court therefore denies defendants' motion to dismiss Haus's claim for relief under the APA.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
The Court therefore denies defendants' motion to dismiss Haus's claim for relief under the APA.
Months pending 31.8 months from the application to the suit; 39.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On November 20, 2014, Haus submitted a petition for U nonimmigrant status for himself and another petition for his wife, as a qualifying family member.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Like the plaintiff in Calderon-Ramirez, he has not set forth any facts that would distinguish him from other U visa applicants who filed before him but also are still waiting for their petitions to be processed.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
U visa claims Waiting list: goes on Read by a model
The Court therefore denies defendants' motion to dismiss Haus's claim for relief under the APA.
Nationality Poland Read by a model
Sebastian Haus, a native and citizen of Poland,

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:17-cv-04972
Filed
July 5, 2017
Ended
July 17, 2018
Suit's filing to its end
377 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 13 (dismissed: settled)

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Seventh 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.