Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Devani v. United States Citizenship & Immigration Services (Uscis)

District of ColumbiaDecided April 12, 2023No. 1:22-cv-01932

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 Nikunj Devani filed this action to compel U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and several affiliated government officials to process his Form I-526, formally known as “Immigrant Petition by Alien Investor,” under the EB -5 Immigrant Investor Program.
Form or filing I-526 (investor petition) Read by a model
to process his Form I-526, formally known as “Immigrant Petition by Alien Investor,”
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
to process his Form I-526, formally known as “Immigrant Petition by Alien Investor,” under the EB -5 Immigrant Investor Program.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will grant USCIS’s Motion to D ismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
USCIS moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is USCIS’s 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 reasons that follow, the Court will dismiss this action under Rule 12( b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will grant USCIS’s Motion to D ismiss.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the reasons that follow, the Court will dismiss this action under Rule 12( b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Months pending 32.2 months from the application to the suit; 41.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Devani filed an I-526 petition, along with all relevant documentation and filing fees, which USCIS received on October 29, 2019.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
In sum, the first two TRAC factors favor USCIS, as USCIS’s approach to processing I-526 petitions is governed by a rule of reason that is not bound by a statutory timetable.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
As to the first factor, USCIS’s adjudication of I -526 petitions is governed by a rule of reason. Under the visa availability approach, USCIS processes petitions on a modified first-in, first-out basis
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality India Read by a model
Devani, a citizen of India,

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-01932
Filed
July 4, 2022
Ended
April 12, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
282 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 D.C. 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.