Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Virginia

Zhang v. Chertoff

Western District of VirginiaMoonDecided June 19, 2007No. 3:06-cv-00066

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
USCIS, in concert with the other agencies involved in the process, has completed five of the six checks required for the adjudication of Plaintiffs' applications.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
On September 2, 2004, Plaintiffs filed an 1-485 application to adjust their status to permanent resident status.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
On December 13, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a complaint seeking to have Defendants adjudicate their 1-485 applications.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (docket entry no. 15) is hereby GRANTED,[2]
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (docket entry no. 15) is hereby GRANTED,[2] this case is *595 hereby DISMISSED
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (docket entry no. 15) is hereby GRANTED,[2]
Months pending 27.3 months from the application to the suit; 33.5 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On September 2, 2004, Plaintiffs filed an 1-485 application to adjust their status to permanent resident status.
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
Because I read § 1255(a) to give USCIS discretion over the entire application process, including its pace, this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the instant case.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:06-cv-00066
Filed
December 13, 2006
Ended
June 19, 2007
Suit's filing to its end
188 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for unrecorded

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why.

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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.