Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Patel v. Mayorkas

District of ColumbiaJia M. CobbDecided November 15, 2024No. 1:24-cv-02216

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
Defendants do not explicitly state where they believe the claim arose, but emphasize that USCIS is headquartered in Camp Springs, Maryland, that Patel’s application remains pending at the USCIS Service Center in Essex Junction, Vermont, and that Patel lives in Florida.
Form or filing I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
his application for a U visa has been unreasonably delayed.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
alleging that his application for a U visa has been unreasonably delayed.
Kind of order A transfer order Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to transfer, ECF 4, is GRANTED.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss; Transfer Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to transfer, ECF 4, is GRANTED. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is DENIED without prejudice to refiling in the transferee district.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On October 8, 2024, Defendants moved to either dismiss this case or transfer it to the Middle District of Florida, where Patel resides, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
Disposition Transferred to another court An order moving the case to another court. It decides where the suit is heard, not who wins, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to transfer, ECF 4, is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to transfer, ECF 4, is GRANTED.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court need not address Defendant’s motion, in the alternative, to dismiss the case.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
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: not decided here Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court need not address Defendant’s motion, in the alternative, to dismiss the case.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-02216
Filed
July 29, 2024
Ended
November 15, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
109 days
How it ended
Transferred
From the record
transfer order 2024-11-15

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.