Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Virginia

Qasimyar v. Mayorkas

Eastern District of VirginiaMichael S NachmanoffDecided June 10, 2025No. 1:24-cv-02244

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
USCIS therefore retains discretion under both the statute and regulations to make decisions regarding parole applications.
Form or filing I-131 (travel document) Read by a model
She filed two Form I- 131 petitions on behalf of her sisters who reside in Afghanistan.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiff Mubina Qasimyar seeks to compel the adjudication of her petitions seeking humanitarian parole on behalf of her sisters.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For that reason, and the reasons that follow, this Court will GRANT Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and DISMISS Plaintiff’s complaint.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, ECF 8, is GRANTED
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (ECF 8).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
all claims against Defendants in Plaintiff’s complaint are DISMISSED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
all claims against Defendants in Plaintiff’s complaint are DISMISSED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
it is further ORDERED that all claims against Defendants in Plaintiff’s complaint are DISMISSED.
Months pending 32.9 months from the application to the suit; 38.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Despite Plaintiff communicating with USCIS regarding the applications, they have remained pending since March of 2022.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-02244
Filed
December 11, 2024
Ended
June 10, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
181 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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.