Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of New Mexico

Romero Ramires v. Wolf

District of New MexicoKea W. RiggsDecided October 20, 2020

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
In contrast, the USCIS has a clear duty to adjudicate placement on the wait list.
Form or filing I-765 (EAD); I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff filed an application for a U-visa and employment authorizations documents.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Count I: Declaratory Judgment for failure to adjudicate her U-visa status and failure to place her on the wait list;
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doe. 3) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, filed May 18, 2020 (Doc. 3).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, filed May 18, 2020 (Doc. 3).
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
Plaintiff has stated a plausible claim that Defendants unreasonably delayed placing her on a U-visa waitlist pursuant to 8 CFR 214.14(d)(2).
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
Plaintiff has stated a plausible claim that Defendants unreasonably delayed placing her on a U-visa waitlist pursuant to 8 CFR 214.14(d)(2).
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
Plaintiff has stated a plausible claim that Defendants unreasonably delayed placing her on a U-visa waitlist pursuant to 8 CFR 214.14(d)(2).
Months pending 34.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
She filed an application for a U-nonimmigrant status and employment authorization on December 11, 2017.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) clearly grants Defendants discretion to adjudicate work authorization under § 1184(p)(6), therefore the Court lacks jurisdiction to order adjudication of work authorization under § 1184(p)(6).
U visa claims Final decision: not decided here; Work permit: dismissed under 1252(a)(2)(b); Waiting list: goes on Read by a model
Count I: Declaratory Judgment for failure to adjudicate her U-visa status and failure to place her on the wait list;

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Tenth 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.