Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Lin v. Mayorkas

Eastern District of New YorkRamon E. Reyes, JrDecided July 7, 2025No. 1:24-cv-01403

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
Plaintiff Xiu Yun Lin (“Plaintiff” or “Lin”) seeks to compel U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) and its officers (collectively “Defendants”) to adjudicate the I-130 Petition for Alien Relative she filed on behalf of her brother in 2014.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
On January 7, 2014, she filed a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative with USCIS on behalf of her biological brother who resides in China.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief and an order to compel Defendants to adjudicate her I- 130 application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) because the timeline for adjudicating such applications is at the agency’s discretion.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons set forth above, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim.
Months pending 121.6 months from the application to the suit; 138 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On January 7, 2014, she filed a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative with USCIS on behalf of her biological brother who resides in China.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 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
The first TRAC factor squarely favors Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted; Visa availability accepted Read by a model
If the Court compelled USCIS to veer from this protocol and adjudicate Plaintiff’s I-130 application earlier than prescribed, Lin would simply “jump the line.”
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
Lastly, the APA claim in this suit is another adequate remedy even if that claim is ultimately unsuccessful.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
Plaintiff became a naturalized citizen of the United States in 2012. (ECF. No. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶ 1). On January 7, 2014, she filed a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative with USCIS on behalf of her biological brother who resides in China.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-01403
Filed
February 26, 2024
Ended
July 8, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
498 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
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 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.