Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Arkansas

Rodriguez v. US Department of Homeland Security

Eastern District of ArkansasLee P. RudofskyDecided September 15, 2026No. 4:25-cv-00687

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
He claims that USCIS has failed to timely adjudicate his petition in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and in violation of the United States Constitution.
Form or filing I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
On May 11, 2021, Mr. Rodriguez filed the U visa petition at issue in this case.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Mr. Rodriguez asks this Court to order USCIS to perform the adjudication that would (if favorable) place him on the U visa waitlist.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the Court grants the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the Court grants the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the Court grants the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
All claims in this case are dismissed without prejudice.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the Court grants the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
All claims in this case are dismissed without prejudice.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
All claims in this case are dismissed without prejudice.
Months pending 49.7 months from the application to the suit; 64.2 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On May 11, 2021, Mr. Rodriguez filed the U visa petition at issue in this case.
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
However, that distinction is not relevant here because the regulation requires a first-in-first-out policy and this Court still cannot order USCIS to put Mr. Rodriguez ahead of earlier filers.
Threshold rulings Mootness argument rejected Read by a model
There was no event that occurred during the case that deprived him of an injury or otherwise rendered his claims moot.
U visa claims Final decision: dismissed; Waiting list: dismissed Read by a model
If Mr. Rodriguez is in any way asking for this kind of relief, the Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the request.
Nationality Mexico Read by a model
Mr. Rodriguez is a citizen of Mexico.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:25-cv-00687
Filed
July 9, 2025
Ended
September 15, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
433 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2026-09-15 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 Eighth 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.