Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Haider v. United States Department of Homeland Security

District of ColumbiaColleen Kollar-KotellyDecided December 1, 2021

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
In this case, USCIS has already adjudicated Haider’s Form I-130 petitions and rendered a decision favorable to Haider.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
On October 31, 2014, Haider filed two Form I-130 petitions for Alien Relatives on behalf of Ryam and Rania Alaskaf.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Indeed, Plaintiff has received the precise relief that she asks this Court to order––expeditious review of her Form I-130 Petition.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ [6] Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants now move under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’1 (“Government”) [6] Motion to Dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Therefore, Haider does not present a live claim related to her Form I-130 petitions to which the court can grant relief, and thus her unreasonable delay claim is moot.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court shall GRANT the Government’s [6] Motion to Dismiss and DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s [1] Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s [1] Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s [1] Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Months pending 73.8 months from the application to the suit 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
On October 31, 2014, Haider filed two Form I-130 petitions for Alien Relatives on behalf of Ryam and Rania Alaskaf.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Therefore, Haider does not present a live claim related to her Form I-130 petitions to which the court can grant relief, and thus her unreasonable delay claim is moot.
Nationality Yemen Read by a model
Haider’s two daughters, Ryam and Rania Alaskaf, are citizens of Yemen
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
Plaintiff Fatima Haider (“Haider”), a lawful permanent resident of the United States, seeks an order compelling the Government to process her daughters’ visa applications expeditiously.

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

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.