Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Ke v. Alfonso-Royals

Eastern District of New YorkSanket J. BulsaraDecided January 8, 2026No. 2:25-cv-03589

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
Here, Ke acknowledges that USCIS conducted an interview on his I-485 petition on September 12, 2025, and subsequently issued him an RFE on October 15, 2025.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
his I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (“I-485”)
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
to compel the adjudication of his I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (“I-485”)
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court ordered Ke to show cause why the case should not be dismissed as moot.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
The Court finds Ke’s claims moot. The action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
The Court finds Ke’s claims moot. The action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
The Court finds Ke’s claims moot. The action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
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
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Because the Government has now taken the action Ke sought to compel, the case is moot.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-03589
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 14)
Filed
June 27, 2025
Ended
January 8, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
195 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.

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 Second 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.