Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Yusupov v. Mayorkas

Eastern District of New YorkEric R. KomiteeDecided December 23, 2021No. 1:21-cv-04066

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 USCIS Read by a model
Plaintiff Gulchehra Yusupov commenced this action in July 2021, seeking to compel the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate her I-485 application for adjustment of status.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
Plaintiff Gulchehra Yusupov commenced this action in July 2021, seeking to compel the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate her I-485 application for adjustment of status.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff Gulchehra Yusupov commenced this action in July 2021, seeking to compel the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate her I-485 application for adjustment of status.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
As a result, I issued an Order to Show Cause as to why this case should not be dismissed as moot, and directed the parties to file letter-briefs on that issue.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Because USCIS has acted in response to Plaintiff’s I- 485 application, this action is dismissed as moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Because USCIS has acted in response to Plaintiff’s I- 485 application, this action is dismissed as moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Because USCIS has acted in response to Plaintiff’s I- 485 application, this action is dismissed as moot.
Months pending 58 months from the application to the suit; 60 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On September 14, 2021, however, USCIS issued Plaintiff an interview notice regarding her application, with an interview date of October 28, 2021.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Because USCIS has acted in response to Plaintiff’s I- 485 application, this action is dismissed as moot.
Nationality Uzbekistan Read by a model
Plaintiff is an Uzbek national who entered the United States in 2010.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-04066
Filed
July 20, 2021
Ended
December 28, 2021
Suit's filing to its end
161 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
order 2021-12-23 dismisses for want of jurisdiction; 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.