Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Chu v. Tong

District of ColumbiaPaul L. FriedmanDecided September 13, 2019

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
On February 22, 2019, during the pendency of this litigation, USCIS completed its review and revoked the I-140 petition covering these plaintiffs, finding various deficiencies.
Form or filing I-140 (immigrant worker petition); I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
the Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Form I-140)
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiffs filed this action (1) to compel the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to complete its review of the Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Form I-140) prepared for three of the plaintiffs by a prospective employer;
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that this case is dismissed.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
See also FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(1). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED;
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On April 12, 2019, defendants filed a motion to dismiss arguing that plaintiffs’ applications for lawful permanent resident status, which require a valid I-140, are now invalid.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
The Court finds that plaintiffs’ claims are moot and that, therefore, it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider this case.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
The Court finds that plaintiffs’ claims are moot and that, therefore, it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider this case.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
The Court finds that plaintiffs’ claims are moot and that, therefore, it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider this case.
Months pending Not stated at filing 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
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
The Court finds that plaintiffs’ claims are moot and that, therefore, it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider this case.

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.