Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Tennessee

Rakeshkumar Patel v. Joseph B. Edlow

Eastern District of TennesseeClifton L CorkerDecided May 4, 2026No. 2:25-cv-00099

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

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
Proceeding pro se, Plaintiff asks the Court to compel U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to adjudicate his pending U-Visa petition.
Form or filing I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff sought to compel USCIS to adjudicate his Form I-918 application.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff sought to compel USCIS to adjudicate his Form I-918 application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s claim is moot, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendant moved to dismiss the case pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure [Doc. 16] after USCIS issued its Denial of Plaintiff’s petition.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendant moved to dismiss the case pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure [Doc. 16]
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s claim is moot, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s claim is moot, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s claim is moot, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
Months pending 9.2 months from the application to the suit; 15.5 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
Plaintiff did not respond to the notice of intent to deny, and on January 9, 2026, USCIS issued its final Decision denying the petition.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
As the requested relief has already been provided and any action the Court could take #: <pageID> would not make affect the rights of the litigants, the case is moot.
U visa claims Final decision: moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff sought to compel USCIS to adjudicate his Form I-918 application. This has now been done.
Nationality India Read by a model
Plaintiff is a citizen of India who currently resides in Newport, Tennessee.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-00099
Filed
June 30, 2025
Ended
May 4, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
308 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
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 Sixth 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.