Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of California

Sadasivan v. Emmel

Eastern District of CaliforniaStanley A. BooneDecided June 26, 2023No. 1:23-cv-00019

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
The IPO is the component of USCIS responsible for adjudicating Form I-526 petitions.
Form or filing I-526 (investor petition) Read by a model
Plaintiff filed a form I-526 petition through the EB-5 program with USCIS on November 19, 2019, by mailing it to USCIS’s Dallas Lockbox.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff challenges only the reasonableness of Defendants’ delays or inaction in the completion of his background checks and adjudication of his I-526 petition, not the grant or denial of this filing.
Kind of order A transfer order Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) is GRANTED;
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss; Transfer Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) is GRANTED; Defendants’ motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3) is DENIED;
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) is GRANTED;
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
Defendants’ motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) is GRANTED;
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) is GRANTED;
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
This case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia;
Months pending 37.5 months from the application to the suit; 43.2 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff filed a form I-526 petition through the EB-5 program with USCIS on November 19, 2019, by mailing it to USCIS’s Dallas Lockbox.
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. 1:23-cv-00019
Filed
January 3, 2023
Ended
June 27, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
175 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. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Ninth 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.