Mandamus decisions / Southern District of New York
Kumar v. Garland
Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener
2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 alleges that on August 2, 2021, he filed his I-360 Petition with USCIS, and that it was assigned to USCIS’s Vermont Service Center. |
|---|---|
| Form or filing |
I-360 (special immigrant petition)
Read by a model
Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant immigration status (“I-360 Petition”) |
| What the suit asked for |
Decide the application
Read by a model
requesting that the Court direct the defendants to adjudicate his pending Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant immigration status (“I-360 Petition”) |
| Kind of order |
A transfer order
Read by a model
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. |
| Motion decided | None Read by a model |
| Whose motion |
The court on its own
Read by a model
Accordingly, this Court transfers this action to that court. |
| Disposition |
Transferred to another court
An order moving the case to another court. It decides where the suit is heard, not who wins, so it is not counted as either side's win.
Read by a model
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. |
| Prevailing party |
Neither side
Read by a model
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. |
| The delay claim |
Not decided here
Read by a model
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. |
| Months pending |
34.3 months from the application to the court's decision
Read by a model
Plaintiff alleges that on August 2, 2021, he filed his I-360 Petition with USCIS, and that it was assigned to USCIS’s Vermont Service Center. |
| TRAC factors | The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model |
| Threshold rulings | None Read by a model |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 1:24-cv-04045
- Filed
- May 28, 2024
- Ended
- June 12, 2024
- Suit's filing to its end
- 15 days
- How it ended
- Transferred
- From the record
- idb disp 0 (transferred to another district)
A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why.
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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.
-
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55
Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance