Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Plesha v. Garland

Eastern District of New YorkBrian M. CoganDecided December 26, 2024No. 1:24-cv-07234

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
USCIS has not yet adjudicated his application.
Form or filing I-601 (waiver) Read by a model
Almost four years later, on March 2, 2023, Borys filed a form I-601 application for a waiver of grounds of inadmissibility with the United States Customs and Immigration Service (“USCIS”).
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
compelling defendants, who are officials of the immigration authorities, to adjudicate his application for a waiver of grounds of inadmissibility.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Plaintiffs take issue with the fact that defendants do not identify specific subparts (1) and (6) of Rule 12(b) as the bases for their motion to dismiss.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before me is defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Plaintiffs lack standing to bring their last claim, that defendants have violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment by failing to adjudicate Borys’ form I-601 application.
Months pending 19.5 months from the application to the suit; 21.8 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Almost four years later, on March 2, 2023, Borys filed a form I-601 application for a waiver of grounds of inadmissibility with the United States Customs and Immigration Service (“USCIS”).
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablenot reached
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the applicant
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
This method for issuing decisions is “a sufficient rule of reason under the TRAC analysis.”
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Moreover, the process by which defendants determine the order of review is not unreasonable. Defendants assert that “USCIS processes I-601s on a first-in-first-out basis.”
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
Where, as here, the APA provides an alternative remedy, plaintiffs cannot satisfy the requirement that “no adequate remedy [be] available.”
Nationality Ukraine Read by a model
Borys Plesha is a citizen of Ukraine.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-07234
Filed
October 15, 2024
Ended
December 27, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
73 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.