Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

SAULNIER v. MILLER

District of ColumbiaBeryl Alaine HowellDecided July 29, 2024No. 1:23-cv-00905

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 CBP Read by a model
Plaintiff seeks judicial review of CBP’s delay in reaching a final decision on his Form I- 192, not of the agency’s final decision on his visa or waiver applications.
Form or filing I-192 Read by a model
Plaintiff filed a second Form I-192 application, which is at issue in this lawsuit, on February 11, 2021.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
an order compelling “DHS to adjudicate and approve [his] Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Non-Immigrant within 30 days or other reasonable period.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants now move to dismiss, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants now move to dismiss, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
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 plaintiff’s complaint is granted.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Plaintiff’s complaint thus must be dismissed for failure to state a claim.
Months pending 25.7 months from the application to the suit; 41.5 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff filed a second Form I-192 application, which is at issue in this lawsuit, on February 11, 2021.
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 needednot reached
Read by a model
Taken altogether, the first and second TRAC factors favor defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Catapulting plaintiff to the front of the line by court ordered priority would necessarily push other noncitizens back.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Canada Read by a model
Plaintiff Marc Saulnier, a citizen of Canada

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-00905
Filed
April 3, 2023
Ended
July 29, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
483 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.

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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.