Mandamus decisions / District of South Carolina
Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener
2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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
asks this court to compel Defendant the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“Defendant” or “USCIS”) to make a decision on her pending Forms I-918 |
|---|---|
| Form or filing |
I-765 (EAD); I-918 (U visa); I-918A
Read by a model
her pending Forms I-918 (Petition for U Nonimmigrant status) |
| What the suit asked for |
Decide the application
Read by a model
to make a decision on her pending Forms I-918 (Petition for U Nonimmigrant status) |
| Kind of order |
A procedural order
Read by a model
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (DE 12) is GRANTED. |
| Motion decided | None Read by a model |
| Whose motion |
The plaintiff's motion
Read by a model
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (DE 12) is GRANTED. |
| Disposition |
Procedural order
A scheduling, briefing, stay, show-cause or other procedural order. Not counted as either side's win.
Read by a model
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (DE 12) is GRANTED. |
| Prevailing party |
Neither side
Read by a model
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (DE 12) is GRANTED. |
| The delay claim |
Not decided here
Read by a model
So there is no need for the Court to reach the merits of the Report at this time. |
| Months pending |
11.6 months from the application to the court's decision
Read by a model
Plaintiff alleges she completed these forms in December 2024 and received receipt numbers. |
| TRAC factors | The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model |
| Threshold rulings | None Read by a model |
| U visa claims |
Final decision: not decided here; Work permit: not decided here
Read by a model
to make a decision on her pending Forms I-918 (Petition for U Nonimmigrant status), |
Other orders in this case
The group holds 3 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.
| Decision | Decided | Judge | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services | June 17, 2025 | Joseph Dawson III | Magistrate judge's recommendation |
| Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThis decision | December 2, 2025 | Joseph Dawson III | Procedural order |
| Merida v. Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration ServicesThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted | July 2, 2026 | Joseph Dawson III | Dismissed in part; some claims go on |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 4:25-cv-05420
- Filed
- June 12, 2025
- Ended
- August 21, 2026
- Suit's filing to its end
- 435 days
- How it ended
- Ended, outcome not recorded
- From the record
- terminated; no disposition recorded
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 Fourth 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.
-
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55
Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Gonzalez v. Cuccinelli, 985 F.3d 357
Fourth Circuit, January 14, 2021. Courts may review delay in placing U-visa petitioners on the waitlist under the TRAC factors and should not dismiss such claims at the pleading stage, but lack jurisdiction over delay in pre-waitlist work-permit requests, a point on which the Sixth Circuit disagrees.
ImmCite: caution, adverse or limiting treatment found. Rejected in the Sixth Circuit by Barrios Garcia v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 25 F.4th 430 (2022).
-
Lovo v. Miller, 107 F.4th 199
Fourth Circuit, July 3, 2024. The 'decision or action' language of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v), which the court treated as coextensive with § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), does not reach USCIS inaction, so a district court may hear a claim that USCIS unreasonably delayed a provisional unlawful-presence waiver.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 5 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-10-29; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.