Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of New York

Aydemir v. Garland

Southern District of New YorkPaul A. CrottyDecided September 6, 2022No. 1:22-cv-00100

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 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 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 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
Aydemir’s Petition contends that USCIS has not adjudicated his application within a reasonable amount of time.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
He subsequently filed a Form I-485 application for adjustment of permanent resident status—commonly known as a green card—in April 2020.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Aydemir’s Petition contends the delay in his green card application has been unreasonable, and that USCIS must be compelled to expedite his application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The Respondents’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The Respondents have moved to dismiss the Petition for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
The Respondents have moved to dismiss the Petition for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The Respondents’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
The Respondents’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The Respondents’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Months pending 28.7 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
He subsequently filed a Form I-485 application for adjustment of permanent resident status—commonly known as a green card—in April 2020.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the applicant
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the applicant
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
Under the first factor—which the D.C. Circuit has characterized as the “most important,” In re Core Communs., Inc., 531 F.3d 849, 855 (D.C. Cir. 2008)—the law and alleged facts favor dismissal.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
USCIS has a rule of reason governing green card applications: a “first in, first out” rule.
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected; APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
In sum, INA Section 1252 does not strip this Court of jurisdiction.
Nationality Turkey Read by a model
Aydemir is a citizen of Turkey who resides in New York.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-00100
Filed
January 5, 2022
Ended
September 7, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
245 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

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

Supreme Court and Second 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.