Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of California

(PS) Komma et al v. Edlow et al

Eastern District of CaliforniaAllison ClaireDecided April 24, 2026No. 2:25-cv-03702

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

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 rule
An I-526E is a petition filed with USCIS to demonstrate that the investment of $800,000 (or more) in a specific Regional Center project complies with EB-5 requirements and will
Form or filing I-526E (investor petition); I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by rule
3. Plaintiff Durga Prasad Komma filed a Form I-526E, Immigration Petition by Regional Center Investor, on March 31, 2025, based on an investment of capital in a rural project, pursuant to 8 U
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by rule
12(b)(1) because courts lack jurisdiction to compel the adjudication of I-485 adjustment applications under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).” ECF No. 6 at 2.
Disposition Magistrate judge's recommendation A magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district judge decides whether to adopt it, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by rule
Prevailing party Neither side Read by rule

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-03702
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 16)
Filed
December 23, 2025
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.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

Supreme Court and Ninth 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.