Mandamus decisions / District of South Carolina

Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of South CarolinaJoseph Dawson IIIDecided June 17, 2025No. 4:25-cv-05420

Read the decision Original on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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 Plaintiff asks this court to compel Defendant USCIS to make a decision on her pending Forms I-918(Petition for U Nonimmigrant status), I-918A(Petition for Qualifying Family Member of U-1 Recipient), and I-765(Application for Employment Authorization) within 14 days.
Form or filing	I-765 (EAD); I-918 (U visa); I-918A Read by a model Plaintiff asks this court to compel Defendant USCIS to make a decision on her pending Forms I-918(Petition for U Nonimmigrant status), I-918A(Petition for Qualifying Family Member of U-1 Recipient), and I-765(Application for Employment Authorization) within 14 days.
What the suit asked for	Decide the application Read by a model Plaintiff asks this court to compel Defendant USCIS to make a decision on her pending Forms I-918(Petition for U Nonimmigrant status), I-918A(Petition for Qualifying Family Member of U-1 Recipient), and I-765(Application for Employment Authorization) within 14 days.
Kind of order	A magistrate judge's recommendation Read by a model Report and Recommendation
Motion decided	None Read by a model
Whose motion	The court on its own Read by a model Moreover, even when the filing fee is paid, the court possesses the inherent authority to ensure that a plaintiff has standing, that federal jurisdiction exists, and that a case is not frivolous.
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 a model Report and Recommendation
Prevailing party	Neither side Read by a model Report and Recommendation
The delay claim	Dismissed Read by a model Accordingly, it is recommended that the District Court dismiss this action without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
Months pending	6 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model Plaintiff alleges she completed these forms in December 2024 and received receipt numbers.
TRAC factors	The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings	None Read by a model
U visa claims	Final decision: dismissed; Work permit: dismissed Read by a model Accordingly, it is recommended that the District Court dismiss this action without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 3 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.

Decision	Decided	Judge	Disposition
Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThis decision	June 17, 2025	Joseph Dawson III	Magistrate judge's recommendation
Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services	December 2, 2025	Joseph Dawson III	Procedural order
Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted	July 2, 2026	Joseph Dawson III	Dismissed in part; some claims go on

How the case ended

Docket: No. 4:25-cv-05420
Filed: June 12, 2025
Ended: August 21, 2026
Suit's filing to its end: 435 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 Fourth 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.

Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55

Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
Gonzalez v. Cuccinelli, 985 F.3d 357

Fourth Circuit, January 14, 2021. Courts may review delay in placing U-visa petitioners on the waitlist under the TRAC factors and should not dismiss such claims at the pleading stage, but lack jurisdiction over delay in pre-waitlist work-permit requests, a point on which the Sixth Circuit disagrees.

ImmCite: caution, adverse or limiting treatment found. Rejected in the Sixth Circuit by Barrios Garcia v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 25 F.4th 430 (2022).
Lovo v. Miller, 107 F.4th 199

Fourth Circuit, July 3, 2024. The 'decision or action' language of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v), which the court treated as coextensive with § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), does not reach USCIS inaction, so a district court may hear a claim that USCIS unreasonably delayed a provisional unlawful-presence waiver.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 5 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-10-29; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.