Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Pennsylvania

PATEL v. BARR

Eastern District of PennsylvaniaR. Barclay SurrickDecided August 13, 2020No. 2:20-cv-03856

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 EOIR Read by a model
The BIA has not yet ruled on the motions.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Patel has come to this Court seeking an order compelling the BIA to rule on the two motions.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be denied.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Preliminary injunction or TRO; Transfer Read by a model
Defendants filed a response to Patel’s Emergency Motion, as well a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or, in the alternative, to transfer this matter
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
On Saturday, August 8, 2020, Defendants filed a response to Patel’s Emergency Motion, as well a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
Disposition Government's motion denied; the case goes on The government's motion (to dismiss, or for summary judgment) was denied, so the case goes on. Counted as the applicant's ruling; a later decision in the case can still go either way. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be denied.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be denied.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be denied.
Months pending 2.1 months from the application to the suit; 2.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On June 4, 2020, through new counsel, Patel filed a motion to reopen and a motion to reconsider with the BIA.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
PATEL v. BARRThis decision August 13, 2020 R. Barclay Surrick Government's motion denied; the case goes on
PATEL v. BARRThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted November 24, 2020 R. Barclay Surrick Government's motion denied; the case goes on

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:20-cv-03856
Filed
August 7, 2020
Ended
December 21, 2020
Suit's filing to its end
136 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why.

Supreme Court and Third 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.