Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Illinois

Brahmbhatt v. USCIS

Northern District of IllinoisJoan Humphrey LefkowDecided June 25, 2026No. 1:25-cv-14770

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
Brahmbhatt brings this action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 555(b), asserting that this court has jurisdiction to compel USCIS to adjudicate his I-485 and that USCIS has no legal basis for failing to do so in a reasonable time.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
his adjustment of status application (I-485)
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
which asks this court to order defendants to adjudicate his adjustment of status application (I-485).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion is granted without prejudice. Case terminated.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants argue that the complaint should be dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Joseph B. Edlow, USCIS Director, move to dismiss (dkt. 11)
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
As such, Brahmbhatt’s claim is dismissed without prejudice.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion is granted without prejudice.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
As such, Brahmbhatt’s claim is dismissed without prejudice.
Months pending 40.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Brahmbhatt, who has held U-1 Nonimmigrant status (U-visa) since November 2019, filed an I-485 in February 2023 to adjust his status to lawful permanent resident (LPR), pursuant to 8 CFR § 245.1.
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
The court does not have jurisdiction to review the delay in processing Brahmbhatt’s I- 485.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-14770
Filed
December 5, 2025
Ended
June 25, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
202 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
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 Seventh 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.