Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Kansas

Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of KansasKathryn H. VratilDecided August 5, 2025No. 2:25-cv-02408

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 July 25, 2025, plaintiff—an active duty service member in the United States Army— filed suit against the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
defendant’s refusal to process his naturalization application
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
Plaintiff asks the Court for a preliminary injunction which requires defendant to immediately schedule a naturalization interview.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint And Motion For Preliminary Relief And Motion To Proceed Pseudonymously (Doc. #1) filed July 25, 2025 is OVERRULED.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
Plaintiff asks the Court for a preliminary injunction which requires defendant to immediately schedule a naturalization interview.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Complaint And Motion For Preliminary Relief And Motion To Proceed Pseudonymously (Doc. #1) filed July 25, 2025.
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
For reasons set forth below, the Court overrules plaintiff’s motion.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For reasons set forth below, the Court overrules plaintiff’s motion.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
Plaintiff has not shown exceptional circumstances which would permit the Court to hear his request without notice to the opposing party. The Court therefore overrules plaintiff’s request for an ex parte temporary restraining order.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

Other orders in this case

The group holds 4 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThis decision August 5, 2025 Kathryn H. Vratil Denied in the government's favor
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services April 27, 2026 Kathryn H. Vratil Magistrate judge's recommendation
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services May 27, 2026 Kathryn H. Vratil Procedural order
Churyumov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted June 8, 2026 Kathryn Hoefer Vratil Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-02408
Filed
July 25, 2025
Ended
June 8, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
318 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.