Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Trujillo v. Jaddou

District of ColumbiaCarl J. NicholsDecided November 18, 2025No. 1:23-cv-01366

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
Although USCIS has since resumed review of Form I-526 petitions under the Regional Center Program, ECF 19 at 7, it has not yet made a final determination on Trujillo’s petition.
Form or filing I-526 (investor petition) Read by a model
Lilian Garcia Trujillo sued several government officials for unreasonably delaying a decision on her Form I-526 petition for an EB-5 visa.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
She requested that the Court issue a writ of mandamus and/or an order under the Administrative Procedure Act compelling the government to act on her Form I-526 petition within 30 days.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 19, is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The government moves to dismiss for failure to state a plausible claim for relief. See ECF 19; Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 19, is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 19, is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 19, is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 19, is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
Months pending 31 months from the application to the suit; 66.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In April 2020, Trujillo invested $900,000 in a project to build luxury hotel rooms, condominiums, meeting spaces, restaurants, and a bar in Big Sky, Montana. ECF 1 at 5. The next month, Trujillo filed a Form I-526 petition with USCIS.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the applicant
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
Given the similar delay here, TRAC factor one favors the government.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
The Court of Appeals held in Da Costa that “USCIS employs a rule of reason to adjudicate Form I-526 petitions” under the same “availabilityscreened queue” approach that Trujillo challenges here.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-01366
Filed
May 15, 2023
Ended
November 18, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
918 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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.