Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Mississippi

Patel v. Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Northern District of MississippiJames D. Maxwell IIDecided March 18, 2026No. 1:25-cv-00111

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
Patel claims USCIS has unreasonably delayed a bona fide determination or BFD.
Form or filing I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
After he was the victim of armed robbery, he filed a petition for a U visa on January 16, 2025.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Patel asks that this Court order the USCIS to issue a BFD within fourteen days.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
USCIS’s Motion to Dismiss [6] is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
USCIS’s Motion to Dismiss [6] is GRANTED. Patel’s bona fide determination claim is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. And his waiting-list claims are DIMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
In response, USCIS filed a Motion to Dismiss [6].
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
With all claims dismissed, this CASE is CLOSED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the above reasons, the Motion to Dismiss [6] is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Patel’s bona fide determination claim is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. And his waiting-list claims are DIMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Months pending 5.7 months from the application to the suit; 14 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
After he was the victim of armed robbery, he filed a petition for a U visa on January 16, 2025.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied; Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected Read by a model
Therefore, Patel’s claim that the USCIS has unreasonably delayed making a bona fide determination about his U visa application is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
U visa claims Bona fide determination: dismissed under 1252(a)(2)(b); Waiting list: dismissed Read by a model
Therefore, Patel’s claim that the USCIS has unreasonably delayed making a bona fide determination about his U visa application is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Nationality India Read by a model
According to his complaint, Patel is a citizen of India who currently resides in Columbus, Mississippi.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-00111
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 11), deciding the motion (ECF 6)
Filed
July 9, 2025
Ended
March 18, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
252 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision, and the motion number is read from that entry's text. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

Supreme Court and Fifth 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.