Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Ikechukwu Mbachu v. Kristi Noem

Eastern District of New YorkOrelia E. MerchantDecided May 25, 2026No. 1:25-cv-02134

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

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
Under USCIS’s “last in-first out” (“LIFO”) scheduling system, which was reimplemented in January 2018 after previously being used for decades, the USCIS Asylum Division schedules recently-filed I-589s for interviews ahead of older ones.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
He is the principal applicant of a Form I-589 filed on March 24, 2022.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
Plaintiffs seek an order from this Court directing Defendants to adjudicate Ikechukwu’s Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589” or “Asylum Application”).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Accordingly, whether Plaintiff has stated an APA claim under Rule 12(b)(6) is the only relevant inquiry.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is Defendants’ fully briefed motion to dismiss the complaint
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Complaint is dismissed without prejudice to refile if there is a continued delay and Plaintiffs are able to state additional facts or causes of action.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Complaint is dismissed without prejudice to refile if there is a continued delay and Plaintiffs are able to state additional facts or causes of action.
Months pending 50 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
He is the principal applicant of a Form I-589 filed on March 24, 2022.
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
Consistent with other decisions in this Circuit, this Court holds that Defendants’ use of a LIFO scheduling system “to deter fraud and abuse by quickly disposing of unmeritorious applications, is an appropriate ‘rule of reason.’”
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Consistent with other decisions in this Circuit, this Court holds that Defendants’ use of a LIFO scheduling system “to deter fraud and abuse by quickly disposing of unmeritorious applications, is an appropriate ‘rule of reason.’”
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Nigeria Read by a model
Ikechukwu is a citizen of Nigeria and a resident of Queens County, New York.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-02134
Filed
April 16, 2025
Ended
May 26, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
405 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 17 (judgment: other), 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.