Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Sajib v. Renaud

Eastern District of New YorkBrian M. CoganDecided April 8, 2022No. 1:21-cv-07039

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
USCIS has not yet adjudicated his petition.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
plaintiff filed an I-485 application to adjust his status to permanent resident
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
to adjudicate his application for an adjustment of his immigration status to permanent resident.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED. This case is dismissed.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
To survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, a complaint must plead “factual allegations sufficient ‘to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.’”
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before me is defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Because defendant has issued an RFE, plaintiff’s claims are moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Because defendant has issued an RFE, plaintiff’s claims are moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Because defendant has issued an RFE, plaintiff’s claims are moot.
Months pending 23.3 months from the application to the suit; 26.5 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On March 30, 2022, following the commencement of this action, USCIS issued to plaintiff a Request for Evidence (“RFE”).
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablenot reached
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
Here, plaintiff’s twenty-six-month wait is far below the approximately forty-four-month upper range for processing times for I-485 applications.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Here, the competing-priority factor counsels against affording plaintiff relief. To grant plaintiff relief would simply jump him ahead of others and push everyone else further back.
Threshold rulings Held moot; APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
Because defendant has issued an RFE, plaintiff’s claims are moot.
Nationality Bangladesh Read by a model
Plaintiff is a national of Bangladesh.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-07039
Filed
December 21, 2021
Ended
April 11, 2022
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 Second 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.