Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Rhode Island

Soto Alvarado v. Garland

District of Rhode IslandWilliam E. SmithDecided December 6, 2022No. 1:22-cv-00184

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
Plaintiffs seek injunctive and mandamus relief, alleging that USCIS’s revocation of Plaintiff Soto Alvarado’s previously granted I-360 petition exceeded its statutory authority.
Form or filing I-360 (special immigrant petition) Read by a model
Plaintiffs seek injunctive and mandamus relief, alleging that USCIS’s revocation of Plaintiff Soto Alvarado’s previously granted I-360 petition exceeded its statutory authority.
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 5, is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
When considering a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and, in the alternative, for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, ECF No. 5.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 5, is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 5, is GRANTED.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 5, is GRANTED.
Months pending 56.9 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On March 29, 2022, USCIS revoked its approval of Plaintiff’s petition.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
This guidance necessitates the conclusion that the decision to revoke the approval of Plaintiff’s petition was discretionary and is therefore not subject to judicial review.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-00184
Filed
May 4, 2022
Ended
July 26, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
9 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 13 (dismissed: settled)

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 First 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.