Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Kansas

Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of KansasKathryn Hoefer VratilDecided June 8, 2026No. 2:25-cv-02408

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
On July 25, 2025, Oleg Churyumov, proceeding pro se, filed Plaintiff’s Complaint And Motion For Preliminary Relief And Motion To Proceed Pseudonymously (Doc. #1) against the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”).
Form or filing N-336; N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
his Form N-400, Application for Naturalization (“naturalization application”)
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
At the time, plaintiff sought an order compelling defendant to schedule his naturalization interview and adjudicate his naturalization application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For reasons explained below, the Court sustains defendant’s motion and overrules plaintiff’s motion.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendant argues that the Court should dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because his claims are moot.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss Complaint And Motion To Deny Plaintiff’s Motion To Amend Complaint (Doc. #18) filed January 15, 2026 and Plaintiff’s Motion To Set Aside Agency Action, Compel Agency Action, And For Expedited Relief (Doc. #27) filed March 25, 2026.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Therefore, plaintiff’s complaint is moot, and the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court sustains defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Therefore, plaintiff’s complaint is moot, and the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court sustains defendant’s motion to dismiss.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Therefore, plaintiff’s complaint is moot, and the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court sustains defendant’s motion to dismiss.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
As discussed above, because the claims in plaintiff’s complaint are moot, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate plaintiff’s motion. Accordingly, the Court overrules it.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
Months since the naturalization interview 1.7 months from the interview (2025-12-09) Read by a model
On December 9, 2025, defendant conducted plaintiff’s interview.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Therefore, plaintiff’s complaint is moot, and the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
Nationality Russia Read by a model
Plaintiff, a non-citizen of Russian nationality, is a United States Army active-duty service member.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 4 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision, this one. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services August 5, 2025 Kathryn H. Vratil Denied in the government's favor
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services April 27, 2026 Kathryn H. Vratil Magistrate judge's recommendation
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services May 27, 2026 Kathryn H. Vratil Procedural order
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted June 8, 2026 Kathryn Hoefer Vratil Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-02408
Filed
July 25, 2025
Ended
June 8, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
318 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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 Tenth 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.