Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Pennsylvania

BYRNE v. NOEM

Eastern District of PennsylvaniaJoel H. SlomskyDecided August 20, 2025No. 2:25-cv-01077

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 asks this Court to compel the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to issue a decision, or at least an initial review, of Plaintiff’s I-914 Application for a T visa submitted on March 22, 2024.
Form or filing I-914 (T visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff asks this Court to compel the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to issue a decision, or at least an initial review, of Plaintiff’s I-914 Application for a T visa submitted on March 22, 2024.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff asks this Court to compel the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to issue a decision, or at least an initial review, of Plaintiff’s I-914 Application for a T visa submitted on March 22, 2024.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Doc. No. 10) will be denied.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Notably, in primarily moving to dismiss the Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Defendants refer to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) in a footnote in their Motion, which reads as follows
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Doc. No. 10)
Disposition Denied in the applicant'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 the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Doc. No. 10) will be denied.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Doc. No. 10) will be denied.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
Counts I and II will not be dismissed for insufficient pleading.
Months pending 17 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff’s I-914 Application for a T visa submitted on March 22, 2024.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Defendants oppose moving Plaintiff to the head of the line for consideration of T visas because it would unfairly prejudice a considerable number of other applicants who may have been waiting longer. There appears to be merit to this argument.
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar rejected Read by a model
Next, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (Mandamus Act), Plaintiff has alleged enough facts to give rise to an inference that USCIS violated a duty for which there is no alternative remedy.
Nationality Ireland Read by a model
Irish national Keith Michael Byrne

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-01077
Filed
February 28, 2025
Ended
May 18, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
444 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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 Third 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.