Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

PATEL v. MAYORKAS

District of ColumbiaLoren L. AliKhanDecided November 27, 2024No. 1:24-cv-01967

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
The Patels’ visa applications are being processed at the USCIS Vermont Service Center, which is not located in either district.
Form or filing I-765 (EAD); I-918 (U visa); I-918A Read by a model
She cooperated with law enforcement and, on May 2, 2022, filed a Form I-918 Petition seeking a U visa.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
to compel a decision on their Form I-918 and I-918A visa petitions.
Kind of order A transfer order Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will transfer the case to the Eastern District of Louisiana but otherwise deny Defendants’ motion.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss; Transfer Read by a model
Defendants move to transfer the case from this court to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana under 28 U.S.C. § 1404, or—in the alternative—for dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3) due to improper venue.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants seek to have this case transferred to the Eastern District of Louisiana under 28 U.S.C. § 1404.
Disposition Transferred to another court An order moving the case to another court. It decides where the suit is heard, not who wins, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will transfer the case to the Eastern District of Louisiana but otherwise deny Defendants’ motion.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will transfer the case to the Eastern District of Louisiana but otherwise deny Defendants’ motion.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will transfer the case to the Eastern District of Louisiana but otherwise deny Defendants’ motion.
Months pending 26.4 months from the application to the suit; 30.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
She cooperated with law enforcement and, on May 2, 2022, filed a Form I-918 Petition seeking a U visa.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
U visa claims Final decision: not decided here; Work permit: not decided here Read by a model
to compel a decision on their Form I-918 and I-918A visa petitions.
Nationality India Read by a model
They are all citizens of India, but they currently reside in New Orleans, Louisiana.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-01967
Filed
July 6, 2024
Ended
February 4, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
213 days
How it ended
Transferred
From the record
idb disp 0 (transferred to another district)

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.