Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Nebraska

Noorani v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of NebraskaRobert F. Rossiter Jr.Decided June 12, 2025No. 8:25-cv-00221

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
Noorani now asks the Court to order the USCIS to either issue a BFD within 14 days or make a waitlist decision in 30 days.
Form or filing I-765 (EAD); I-918 (U visa); I-918A Read by a model
On December 13, 2024, he filed an I-918 Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status and a Form I-765 Application for Employment Authorization with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”).
What the suit asked for Issue a work permit Read by a model
In particular, he complains the USCIS has failed to issue a bona fide determination (“BFD”) and employment authorization document (“EAD”) that would allow him to work while his U-visa application is pending.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The Director’s Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 5) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) is granted as applied to plaintiff Hamidabanu Noorani’s amended complaint (Filing No. 13).
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Summary judgment Read by a model
The Director’s Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 5) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) is granted as applied to plaintiff Hamidabanu Noorani’s amended complaint (Filing No. 13).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Now before the Court is the USCIS Director’s (the “Director”) Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 5) Noorani’s complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
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
The Director’s Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 5) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) is granted as applied to plaintiff Hamidabanu Noorani’s amended complaint (Filing No. 13).
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Noorani’s first claim challenging the USCIS’s delays in making a bona fide determination and issuing him work authorization documents is dismissed without prejudice.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
The Director is ordered to file supplemental briefing addressing the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction over Noorani’s remaining waitlist claims
Months pending 5.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On December 13, 2024, he filed an I-918 Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status and a Form I-765 Application for Employment Authorization with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”).
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
Because § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) strips the Court of jurisdiction to consider such challenges, the first claim in Noorani’s amended complaint must be dismissed.
U visa claims Bona fide determination: dismissed under 1252(a)(2)(b); Waiting list: not decided here Read by a model
Because § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) strips the Court of jurisdiction to consider such challenges, the first claim in Noorani’s amended complaint must be dismissed.
Nationality India Read by a model
Plaintiff Hamidabanu Noorani (“Noorani”) is an Indian national who has resided in the United States for several years.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Noorani v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThis decision June 12, 2025 Robert F. Rossiter Jr. Granted in the government's favor
Noorani v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted November 25, 2025 Robert F. Rossiter, Jr. Denied in the applicant's favor

How the case ended

Docket
No. 8:25-cv-00221
Filed
March 27, 2025
Ended
July 6, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
466 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
terminated; no disposition recorded

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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.