Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Nibber v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of ColumbiaBeryl A. HowellDecided December 15, 2020No. 1:20-cv-03207

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
For the foregoing reasons, USCIS’s delay in adjudicating plaintiff’s applications to extend her H-4 status and renew her work authorization is not sufficiently unreasonable at present for the Court to compel agency action under the APA or the Mandamus Act.
Form or filing I-539 (change or extension of stay); I-765 (EAD) Read by a model
The adjudication of a Form I-539 application for H-4 status and a Form I-765 are interrelated.
What the suit asked for Issue a work permit Read by a model
Plaintiff moves for injunctive relief, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, that would direct defendants to continue her employment authorization, which, as explained above, expired on November 30, 2020, for the duration of this litigation.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
her motion for preliminary injunction must be denied.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (“Pl.’s Mot.”), ECF No. 9
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Upon consideration of plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (“Pl.’s Mot.”), ECF No. 9
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
Plaintiff has therefore failed to demonstrate that she is likely to succeed on the merits of her claims, and her motion for preliminary injunction must be denied.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Plaintiff has therefore failed to demonstrate that she is likely to succeed on the merits of her claims, and her motion for preliminary injunction must be denied.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
Plaintiff has therefore failed to demonstrate that she is likely to succeed on the merits of her claims, and her motion for preliminary injunction must be denied.
Months pending 2.4 months from the application to the suit; 3.6 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On August 26, 2020, plaintiff and her spouse filed a Form I- 129, Form I-539, and Form I-765, seeking to extend Bhanot’s H-1B visa, plaintiff’s H-4 visa, and plaintiff’s EAD.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the applicant
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
The first TRAC factor weighs in favor of defendants.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
The first TRAC factor weighs in favor of defendants. USCIS processes Form I-539 and Form I-765 applications “on a first-in, first-out” basis
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:20-cv-03207
Filed
November 6, 2020
Ended
February 25, 2021
Suit's filing to its end
111 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

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 D.C. 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.