Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

GUPTE v. NOEM

District of ColumbiaTrevor N. McFaddenDecided September 29, 2026No. 1:26-cv-00445

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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
The EB-5 process begins with a Form I-526E petition for classification as an immigrant investor, which the immigrant submits to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”).
Form or filing I-526E (investor petition) Read by a model
In June 2024, Gupte filed an I-526E petition “along with substantial documentation relating to the Company and [its] lawful source and path of investment funds.”
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Her claims under the Administrative Procedure Act and Mandamus Act seek to compel the Department “to perform [its] non-discretionary duty and adjudicate the Petition.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
It thus will dismiss Gupte’s case for lack of jurisdiction and deny her cross-motion for summary judgment.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Summary judgment Read by a model
The Department moves to dismiss Gupte’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1). Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 13, at 7. Gupte opposes the Department’s motion to dismiss and cross-moves for summary judgment.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
Gupte opposes the Department’s motion to dismiss and cross-moves for summary judgment.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
It thus will dismiss Gupte’s case for lack of jurisdiction and deny her cross-motion for summary judgment.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
It thus will dismiss Gupte’s case for lack of jurisdiction and deny her cross-motion for summary judgment.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
It thus will dismiss Gupte’s case for lack of jurisdiction and deny her cross-motion for summary judgment.
Months pending 27.5 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In June 2024, Gupte filed an I-526E petition
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
That holding results from “the text and context” of § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii)—“which is, after all, a jurisdictionstripping statute”—paired with the provision that grants the Department discretion in processing I-526E petitions.
Nationality India Read by a model
Gupte “is a national of India”

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:26-cv-00445
Filed
February 12, 2026
Ended
September 29, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
126 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2026-09-29 for the defendants, ground not stated

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 D.C. 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.