Mandamus decisions / District of Kansas
Hamzat Abdulhammed Kanmi v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo
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 rule
by filing an I-485 application with USCIS but claims Defendants are unreasonably withholding adjudication. Congress gave the Attorney General (whose authority is delegated to the |
|---|---|
| Form or filing |
I-485 (adjustment of status)
Read by rule
States who is awaiting approval of his I-485 application seeking an adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence. Frustrated by the one-year delay, he has sued the United States |
| Motion decided |
Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction
Read by rule
C. § 1361.2 Defendants move to dismiss Plaintiff’s claim under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 6:25-cv-01228
- Filed
- October 20, 2025
- Ended
- May 20, 2026
- Suit's filing to its end
- 212 days
- How it ended
- Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
- From the record
- order 2026-05-20 dismisses for want of jurisdiction; idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant
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 Tenth 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.
-
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55
Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Forest Guardians v. Babbitt, 174 F.3d 1178
Tenth Circuit, April 22, 1999. Missing a concrete statutory deadline is agency action unlawfully withheld that a court must compel, while without a deadline the question is unreasonable delay; the holding still binds in the Tenth Circuit.
ImmCite: caution, adverse or limiting treatment found. Not followed in the Ninth Circuit by Al Otro Lado v. Noem, 138 F.4th 1102 (2025).