Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Maryland

Mirzajanov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of MarylandStephanie A. GallagherDecided July 1, 2026No. 1:26-cv-00107

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
Here, the statutory language clearly states that USCIS is required to adjudicate Petitioner’s asylum application – it is an act that Congress said “shall be completed.”
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
On December 16, 2022, Petitioner submitted an I-589 Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
asking this Court to compel USCIS to expedite adjudication of his Form I-589 Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons set forth above, Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss, or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment, ECF 9, is treated as a motion for summary judgment and GRANTED.
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
For the reasons set forth above, Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss, or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment, ECF 9, is treated as a motion for summary judgment and GRANTED.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Respondents have filed a Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment.
Disposition Granted in the government's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
For the reasons set forth above, Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss, or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment, ECF 9, is treated as a motion for summary judgment and GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Application of the TRAC factors in this case, therefore, demonstrates that summary judgment in favor of Respondents is warranted.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
Application of the TRAC factors in this case, therefore, demonstrates that summary judgment in favor of Respondents is warranted.
Months pending 42.5 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On December 16, 2022, Petitioner submitted an I-589 Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the applicant
  • 3. Human health and welfareneutral
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedneutral
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
The first factor, the “rule of reason,” favors Respondents.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
LIFO is an imperfect system that places some applicants ahead of others in line, but USCIS offers a valid reason for its use, and it provides “an orderly chronological approach.”
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:26-cv-00107
Filed
January 14, 2026
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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 Fourth 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.