Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Texas

Koppula v. Jaddou

Western District of TexasRobert PitmanDecided May 15, 2023No. 1:22-cv-00844

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 USCIS Read by a model
They ask the Court to compel USCIS to act, per 5 U.S.C. § 706(1) and 5 U.S.C. § 555(b).
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
both filed Form I-485, Adjustment of Status Applications, based on their approved visa petitions, on September 10, 2021.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
They ask the Court to compel USCIS to act, per 5 U.S.C. § 706(1) and 5 U.S.C. § 555(b).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 20), is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Before the Court is the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (“USCIS”) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Failure to State a Claim, (Dkt. 20), and the United States Department of State’s (“DOS”) Motion to Dismiss, (Dkt. 30).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 20), is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Without a clear mandate, the Court has no jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims. Therefore, it must dismiss all claims in this case.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Without a clear mandate, the Court has no jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims. Therefore, it must dismiss all claims in this case.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Without a clear mandate, the Court has no jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims. Therefore, it must dismiss all claims in this case.
Months pending 11.3 months from the application to the suit; 20.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
both filed Form I-485, Adjustment of Status Applications, based on their approved visa petitions, on September 10, 2021.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality India Read by a model
Plaintiffs are citizens and nationals of India living and working in the United States in lawful H-1B status.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-00844
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 34), deciding the motion (ECF 30) and the motion (ECF 20)
Filed
August 19, 2022
Ended
March 18, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
942 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.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision, and the motion numbers are read from that entry's text. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

Supreme Court and Fifth 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.